Super Columbine Supporters Withdraw From Slamdance Game Competition
Our coverage of the Super Columbine Massacre RPG continues with recent developments from the remaining finalists.
A few days ago, Slamdance Guerrilla Gamemakers Competition coordinators withdrew Danny Ledonne’s game Super Columbine Massacre RPG from the list of 14 finalists. Ledonne gave an interview with Next Generation explaining his disappointment with the Slamdance comittee and his insistence that his game offers meaningful social commentary. A few of the remaining finalists stood united and withdrew their games in protest. The makers of flOw, Braid, Toblo, Once Upon a Time, and Everyday Shooter have officially pulled their games from the competition until SCMRPG is reinstated.
Eight of the developers wrote an open letter to the Slamdance organizers admonishing them to reinstate the game in the festival. From the letter:
It is legitimate for games to take on difficult topics and to challenge conventional ideas about what video games can do. No game should be rejected for moral or other reasons after a panel of judges has found the game to be of artistic merit and worthy of inclusion in the festival. We find it very unlikely that a similar decision would have been made about a jury-selected film, and see this decision as hurting the legitimacy of games as a form of expression, exploration, and experience.
The letter was signed by four of the eight remaining finalists and three designers of the withdrawn games. There has been no word yet if any of the remaining developers will follow suit and join their rebellious brethren in protest. The Slamdance coordinators have a live pickle on their hands. If they don’t respond quickly, the remaining four who signed the open letter may revoke their spot on the list of finalists. There wouldn’t be much competition with four finalists left, and that would be a sorry lot to choose from.
Super Columbine supporters shun Slamdance [Joystiq]
Toots
Posted to Video Games on 9 January 2007
· Comments (11)
Other stuff like this: slamdance, super columbine massare rpg
“There wouldn’t be much competition with four finalists left, and that would be a sorry lot to choose from”
Why? because they refused to be pressured into withdrawing? or signing something they disagree with?
at the risk of sounding “uncool”, what if it was a different kind of game that we were talking about.what if it was one of those vile, racist games that the neo-nazis put out, where you kill jews, and blacks, and gays? the makers would try and make an argument that it’s “meaningful social commentary”.
would there be an uproar if that was removed? there’s something really pretentious about this Ledonne guy…it’s like he’s saying “look how edgy and REAL i can be…and if you don’t agree…well, you just don’t GET it.”
no, i do GET it…i just don’t BUY it.
A competition that started with 14 finalalists that got widdled down to four would look terrible. The “winner” wouldn’t necessarily be the best of the year. Also, if most of your competitors drop out and your are the four left, it’s not like you would get much respect in that position.
I still don’t understand why people are speculating about hate-filled racist and homophobic games that have not been made yet, and using them as an argument against this game. I think many are missing the point that this is a specific example of a game that touches on a subject that has been covered in other forms of art and awarded, whereas he is getting reprimanded. Would Ledonne have been awarded if he made a documentary about Columbine and not a game?
Toots i see where you are coming from… but you have to admit… movies and video games are two different things… video games turned movies will never be good because they can never capture what a video game does for a gamer… when you see a movie you are sitting back and watching it and seeing it from the directors and the writers point of view… now the point of view from the writers or the director is not that it was okay or fun that this happened to this school and community… but just letting people know what happened and let them judge it for themselves
video games on the other hand are suppose to be fun… you act out doing something that you wouldn’t do in real life… the fact taht you play as the two teens going around and killing the students and thats the goal of the game… (which we play video games to have fun… not to think about it… but movies on the other hand can be fun but make you think more) it just seems so disrespectfull.
and you say how you don’t understand how we are speculating about hate-filled racist and homophobic games that have not been made yet… well i can speak for only myself… but the reason why i did that and will cont to is to show an example… to help get my point of view accross by kinda putting the readers of what i have to say in my shoes… because i see hate-filled racist and homphobic games that have not been made yet are as bad as SCMRPG… but others don’t
so as another example to get my point across… so schindler’s list is an a great film that really makes you think and gives you a view of what it was like in nazi-germany… what if someone made a game about nazi-germany where you are the nazi soliders and you have to kill jews and send them off to a camp and watch them get baked alive in an oven and such… would a game like that be okay? would it be “fun” to play a game like that? what if someone made a matthew shepard game (like i said before in my comments when this was first posted on here) where you were the two homophobes who have to lead him to the bathroom and try and kill him and then chase him outside of the truck when he tries to escape and gay bash him and leave him out in the field to die and bleed to death for 10,000 bonus points… i don’t know about you guys but i would have a problem with that because its just so disrespectfull to how he died… and this SCMRPG shows NO respect what-so-ever for those poor kids who died in that school.. who are now part of a video game where now their memory and how they died can be reenacted by some guy in front of his comptuer and having fun while doing so
I have never argued that movies and games were the same. It’s obvious that they are two separate media. What I’ve been trying to argue ad nauseum is that from an artist’s perspective, they are two avenues of self expression. When dealing with the same topic, why is one avenue admissible and the other is not?
Instead of defining what a game is supposed to be, aren’t you glad that someone is trying to expand what defines a video game? Most forms of art are judged by motives behind creative expression, and the ability to effectively utilize the medium for expression. If someone would create a Matthew Shepard game, or a Neo Nazi killfest, the motives behind creating such a game would have to be evaluated. I doubt any person could create a game of any artistic or moral value about those topics.
a video game is just that… a game… i guess i just don’t see video games as an art form… i see it as entertainment only… and i don’t think we as a social community have any right to play around or make this tragic event into a game… now i ask a personal question… what if someone you loved… someone you were so close to like say your brother or lover or mother died in a supermarket shooting that was very tragic… would you be okay with someone making a game about that… and in that game they feature your mother or lover or whoever that was close to you, in that game so you as a player can kill them… would that be respectfull to how that person died… would you be okay knowing that some stranger on the other side of the country or your neighbor is playing that game killing your close loved one through a game?
i’m sorry if i’m repeating myself… sometimes its hard for me to try and get my point of view across… and i tend to repeat lol but really what i’m trying to say is… in a movie… you have no control… you just watch what happened and how that happened and you try to understand why… in video games… you are in control… you make these things happen… and you have fun doing so… if it wasn’t fun why would the average person play it? most people (and i’m one of them) don’t play video games to think… i read books and watch movies for that… i play video games to have fun… to waste a little bit of time that i have… and i just really find it in poor taste like i said before that these poor kids who lost their lives are now having how they were killed reenacted by someone who is playing a game… and games are for fun… thats why its called games lol anyways… so thats what i have to say about it… and i still see where you are coming from but clearly i guess we just have different points of view on this toots which is of course fine… i don’t think your wrong… i just don’t agree with you
We don’t have to agree, but I believe that it would be better to consider broadening the scope of gaming instead of limiting it to escapist entertainment. At one point in time poetry was created, theater was created, film was created. Video Games are the natural progression of narrative art. To limit the potential of a medium to polite topics would be a disservice to this blossoming artform.
“I still don’t understand why people are speculating about hate-filled racist and homophobic games that have not been made yet”
but, they HAVE been made…that’s what i’m saying.
you’ve never heard of “ETHNIC CLEANSING”?
http://www.adl.org/videogames/default.asp
what if the maker wanted their game entered into the competition? would it be okay? would you protest if it was banned? What about free speech?
You have found a few games with a singular motive, to promote hatred and intolerance. The reason why I said, “I still don’t understand why people are speculating about hate-filled racist and homophobic games that have not been made yet.” was because no specific examples have been brought up in debate.
When judging any form of art, it’s important to evaluate the motive behind it. “Ethnic Cleansing” was created by National Alliance a white supremacy group that promotes hatred and intolerance. There is no socially redeeming value behind a game with such motives.
The reason why Super Columbine Massacre RPG is an effective piece of art, is that Ledonne wanted to foster debate with this game. He wanted to create a game that nurtures discussion and debate about his game and video games in general. Everyone involved with this discussion has a better understanding of their moral values associated with the gaming industry because of this game.
“There is no socially redeeming value behind a game with such motives.”
they would disagree.and that’s the SAME argument that some have used about the columbine game.
This is an interesting debate and I certainly hope I haven’t given the impression that I gloat about how “edgy” I am… but rather that Slamdance has asked for controversial material, gotten it, and then ran in the other direction for reasons that are still unclear to me (amorphous “moral obligations” as Slamdance director Peter Baxter describes them).
But I think there’s a large issue at hand here:
Toots wrote, “If someone would create a Matthew Shepard game, or a Neo Nazi killfest, the motives behind creating such a game would have to be evaluated. I doubt any person could create a game of any artistic or moral value about those topics.”
If we really believe games are artistically meritable as a medium, then YES, there can be games about Matthew Shepard and Neo Nazism and they CAN have artistic and moral value. Think of films like ‘Laramie Project’ or ‘American History X.’ Are videogames WHOLLY INCAPABLE of approaching these topics?
I quote Patrick Dugan, game developer and staunch SCMRPG defender:
“If we can’t have the guts as artists to stand up and make a controversial statement with our medium, we don’t deserve to have it. Either everything is okay to make art about, or nothing is. Maintaining a safe zone of taboo subject matter will not appease opportunistic politicians, but rather will relegate our medium to a niche hobby-hole where it can be cornered, nuetered, and sold in clean, heartless parcels.”
Debate on… and email me if you want to throw your two cents my way; gaming is changing and my game is by no means alone in the serious games movement (September 12th, McDonald’s Videogame, Darfur is Dying, Disaffected, and many more in the works).
I think you’re all missing the point – that the Slamdance Games Jury is being wholly hypocritical.
If they had such moral objections to begin with, why was it even allowed in the competition at all? Not until it was made a finalist was it suddenly removed from competition. To me, that smacks of censorship and possibly external influence, thereby tainting the entire competition. In other words, if they had said “No, your game is not allowed based on what we deem acceptable” at the beginning, there would be nothing to discuss. It’s their competition and they are free to do as they like. But once they DID accept it into the competition, all bets are off. Removing the game after the fact sets a horrible, horrible precedent.
Keep in mind that some of these game developers have even said that while they do not LIKE the actual game on a moral level, that has NOTHING TO DO with why they pulled out, and everything to do with what I just said.