Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Humanity, always eager to plumb new depths:


http://csgv.org/action/tell-amateur-animator-newtown-massacre-game-ads/

Hey Obama!

I got a drone target for you nobody would mind.

Relapse wrote:
Humanity, always eager to plumb new depths:


http://csgv.org/action/tell-amateur-animator-newtown-massacre-game-ads/

If you find it disgusting then why distribute it so more people can see it?

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Relapse wrote:
Humanity, always eager to plumb new depths:


http://csgv.org/action/tell-amateur-animator-newtown-massacre-game-ads/

If you find it disgusting then why distribute it so more people can see it?

The link I provided is one to take down the site.

Hold your horses folks:

The Article wrote:The creator of the game, Sydney resident Ryan Jake Lambourn, claims he wants to draw attention to the fact that “absolutely nothing positive has come out of [the tragedy at Newtown],” and says he supports the reform of American gun laws

Something to think about. As far as I can tell, he's not doing it as a joke but to highlight problems in society. But what do I know?

Edit: Not supporting here folks, just sayin'.

 liquidjoshi wrote:
Hold your horses folks:

The Article wrote:The creator of the game, Sydney resident Ryan Jake Lambourn, claims he wants to draw attention to the fact that “absolutely nothing positive has come out of [the tragedy at Newtown],” and says he supports the reform of American gun laws

Something to think about. As far as I can tell, he's not doing it as a joke but to highlight problems in society. But what do I know?

Edit: Not supporting here folks, just sayin'.

True, that could be one way of looking at it, but I have seen that type explanation more than once over the years by exploiters of tragedies.

Relapse wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Relapse wrote:
Humanity, always eager to plumb new depths:


http://csgv.org/action/tell-amateur-animator-newtown-massacre-game-ads/

If you find it disgusting then why distribute it so more people can see it?

The link I provided is one to take down the site.

Yes, but that take down site also has a link to the game. Would it be fair to say that a lot of negative press around this is just acting as advertisement?

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Relapse wrote:
Humanity, always eager to plumb new depths:


http://csgv.org/action/tell-amateur-animator-newtown-massacre-game-ads/

If you find it disgusting then why distribute it so more people can see it?

The link I provided is one to take down the site.

C
Yes, but that take down site also has a link to the game. Would it be fair to say that a lot of negative press around this is just acting as advertisement?

I guess the people put it there so others wouldn't just have what they say to go on in signing the petition.

so anti gunner makes offensive game, because he feels that not enough was done after sandy hook.

so more anti gunners dogpile on, create a bunch of negative press, in hopes that they will drum up more support for anti 2nd amendment laws, by continuing to find new ways to use a tragedy to further an agenda.

looks like more grave dancing to me,

sad, just sad.

 easysauce wrote:
so anti gunner makes offensive game, because he feels that not enough was done after sandy hook.

so more anti gunners dogpile on, create a bunch of negative press, in hopes that they will drum up more support for anti 2nd amendment laws, by continuing to find new ways to use a tragedy to further an agenda.

looks like more grave dancing to me,

sad, just sad.

Wait until they find a copy of this game on the next mass shooter's computer.

Seems like the guy is trying to get attention its pathetic.


PS-I would like Ryan Jake Lambourn in the testicles until my foot broke.

 commisar rhodes wrote:
Seems like the guy is trying to get attention its pathetic.


PS-I would like Ryan Jake Lambourn in the testicles until my foot broke.

You might want to edit that one again.

Relapse wrote:

 commisar rhodes wrote:
Seems like the guy is trying to get attention its pathetic.


PS-I would like Ryan Jake Lambourn in the testicles until my foot broke.

You might want to edit that one again.

Engraved in the internet forever

It seems like a lot of people still think that interactive mediums are only meant for entertainment, and not artistic merits.

I could see how a game based on such traumatic events could make for an incredibly impacting artistic piece. Granted, it might just be a cheap joke or attempt to draw attention, but how many of the people complaining about it have taken the time to play it, or even research it past its most basic premise, to actually know?
If videogames are ever going to be appreciated as a true art form, they're going to end up having to go into some sensitive spaces.

Eh, some guy makes something for shock value. Not big surprise. What I am surprised by is that he is for gun control. I always thought those guys at least pretended to respect the tragedies they base their arguments on.

An anti-2nd-Amendment guy is using his 1st Amendment to make a violent game to make some sort of point because he is pissed.

The pro-2nd-Amendment guys are pissed off that somebody is using his 1st Amendment to make a stupid point.

This is why we can't have nice things...

 Fafnir wrote:
It seems like a lot of people still think that interactive mediums are only meant for entertainment, and not artistic merits.

I could see how a game based on such traumatic events could make for an incredibly impacting artistic piece. Granted, it might just be a cheap joke or attempt to draw attention, but how many of the people complaining about it have taken the time to play it, or even research it past its most basic premise, to actually know?
If videogames are ever going to be appreciated as a true art form, they're going to end up having to go into some sensitive spaces.

I believe it to be a work of art. I played the game after seeing the article and it has some symbolism. The main one is the way the character is portrayed. He is a basic frame with straight pointed limbs, and he's constantly dripping or shedding or something falls from him throughout.

Relapse wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Relapse wrote:
Humanity, always eager to plumb new depths:


http://csgv.org/action/tell-amateur-animator-newtown-massacre-game-ads/

If you find it disgusting then why distribute it so more people can see it?

The link I provided is one to take down the site.

Which happens to include links to the game itself...Ironically, this outrage will simply serve to increase the games exposure and popularity.

 d-usa wrote:
An anti-2nd-Amendment guy is using his 1st Amendment to make a violent game to make some sort of point because he is pissed.

The pro-2nd-Amendment guys are pissed off that somebody is using his 1st Amendment to make a stupid point.

This is why we can't have nice things...

Exactly... he's free to do this.

Just as we're free to call him an donkey-cave.

See? Working as designed.

I....am forced to agree with d-usa. I feel extremely dirty now.


....But this guy is still a <CENSORED>.

So if someone makes an artistic exhibit examining any traumatic or heinous event, they are a <CENSORED>, then?

It's like saying that Schindler's List is awful because it deals with the Holocaust.

EDIT: After playing the game, I can safely say that this wasn't made to be a joke. During the short time I spent playing it (it's not a very long game), I couldn't actually bring myself to shoot any of the students/teachers, and felt physically disgusted. And I feel that's pretty much the designer's intention. It showed quite a disconnect, very effectively through the use of an interactive medium, between someone 'normal,' and someone who was so disturbed as the Sandy Hook shooter. It's very much artfully done, and an excellent example of games being used as a way of artistic expression.

 Fafnir wrote:
So if someone makes an artistic exhibit examining any traumatic or heinous event, they are a <CENSORED>, then?

It's like saying that Schindler's List is awful because it deals with the Holocaust.

EDIT: After playing the game, I can safely say that this wasn't made to be a joke. During the short time I spent playing it (it's not a very long game), I couldn't actually bring myself to shoot any of the students/teachers, and felt physically disgusted. And I feel that's pretty much the designer's intention. It showed quite a disconnect, very effectively through the use of an interactive medium, between someone 'normal,' and someone who was so disturbed as the Sandy Hook shooter. It's very much artfully done, and an excellent example of games being used as a way of artistic expression.

We both played the same way. I didn't kill anybody in the school, and I exited when I found out I had to kill myself. Also did you try to see if there was a way to pass killing your mom?

No, I followed the prompts as they happened, which could actually say a lot, both about game design, and how we react to suggestion and instruction. Compared to the 'option' of whether or not to shoot the students, shooting the mother felt so natural, simply because of the prompt telling you to. It felt very twisted. When I finally got to the school, I didn't want to go any further. Watching everyone run and hide as you entered the classrooms was quite surreal.

Although I did manage pull the trigger on myself.

It's certainly not meant to be an enjoyable experience, and I seriously doubt that anyone decrying it for simply existing hasn't even played it.

There was a commercial game with a similar theme about 15 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_(video_game)
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/postal

I played it and it made me feel sick. The artist's purphose was achieved.

 Fafnir wrote:
It seems like a lot of people still think that interactive mediums are only meant for entertainment, and not artistic merits.

So very much agreed.

Relapse wrote:

True, that could be one way of looking at it, but I have seen that type explanation more than once over the years by exploiters of tragedies.

Do you think the creator of the game is making money off of this?

The sound in the game, the way he walks and everything, it makes you......feel wrong. I hate pressing every button TBH. IT is sickening. This is not a game.

In which case I fail to see the point. We all know the guy was a monster and that what happened was horrible.

Anyone try gun control Mode? Where it wasnt advocating no guns allowed? But proper security of the guns?

How many people have actually played out the entire game?

I did. The first time you do it, you play on "Historically Accurate" mode, and yeah, you walk through the school, mowing down all the teachers and children with your assault rifle. And then at the very end the police come and you shoot yourself in the head.

HOWEVER.

Once you play it the first time, you get a prompt telling you to play the game a second time, this time on "Gun control mode". In gun control mode the circumstances are the same, but instead of a handgun you use knives to kill your mother, and when you try to get the AR-15 you can't because it's locked in a safe. So instead of going to the School with a gun, you go with a katana. (lulz)

You do the same thing as before, try to kill all the students and teachers, but it takes soooo much longer to perform the mission because you have to go all the way to the other side of the room to kill people. Also, they can avoid you or run past you faster than you can swing the sword.

When the mission was over, my kill-tally on Gun Control mode was 3, and I was trying my hardest to kill everyone. By comparison, my tally on "historic mode" was 30.

So, the game might very well be "tasteless", but to say that it's attention-whoring is stupid. The man is quite CLEARLY trying to put out a message, that message being: "Look at how things would have been different if the guy hadn't had access to all these guns".

Which is a fair point, I guess.