Joystiq needs new non-hideously-ugly t-shirts. NAO!

How do you propose standing up for what we believe in?

I'd like to find out which advertisers were threatening to pull out over the inclusion of the game and raise some hell. I'm guessing whichever company made the threat was not counting on, say, bad press from Slashdot and Penny Arcade.

The gaming industry is clearly far beyond it's 'infant' stage. Atari was the infant stage, we are now reaching critical mass.

The accompanying image for this story exemplifies a growing problematic trend that I've seen on in Joystiq comments and other gaming sites: the gaming community, in an attempt to protect their entertainment/art form/freedom of speech/first amendment are more and more pointing the finger at firearms as the problem for all the violence that some people blame on games. Even SCMRPG (above screenshot) is showing this.

I would advise anyone to not promote getting rid of or restrict one amendment to protect another amendment, or to use guns (and other inanimate objects) as a scapegoat for a lot of things that get blamed on games.

Please live your lives and educate your children responsibly.

Because remember, a game isn't any good unless its exclusively for adults and is controversial or shocking. Being fun to play or well-designed just isn't important. Luckily, we're comparing two mediums that are EXACTLY THE SAME, so drawing parallels is so easy.

"Being fun to play or well-designed just isn't important."

Well designed can result in something other than being fun to play. There are plenty of important films that aren't fun to watch. Resnais' Night and Fog for one.

Keeping the sponsors happy gives us ABC, NBC, and CBS. Worthless.

Elephant deserves to sent into the void where no other human would ever have to view it again. I thought scrpg was a piece of trash but elephant doesn't explore anything but people shoulders through painfully long tracking shots.

I'd like to see which PRO-CENSORSHIP and ANTI-FREEDOM-LOVING companies wanted to drop out. >:(

Well, i do seem to remember SCMRPG being on the list of 10 worst games ever, most likely for the reasons of it being too offensive, so maybe it actually WAS that offensive (not simply for the fact that it deals with such a sensitive issue, but perhaps in the grossly insensitive way it dealt with that issue)

Hey #4 - do you even know what the 2nd amendment says? "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Where in there does it say anything about automatic weapons or armor-piercing rounds, or any of the other things that people try to protect under this amendment? See the part about the militia? They don't exist anymore, the military took their place, so essentially all this amendment can be taken to mean in modern times is that the military should be able to own weapons. Face it, this is a ridiculous revolutionary war holdover that should have had a sunset clause (look it up) on it so that today's idiots can't use it as a catch-all method to protect their right to kill anything that walks.

schindler's list, this is not. it explores nothing, only exploits.

My initial gut reaction when I heard about this game was one of outrage. Regardless of this, I went to the creator's site. Read the well-articulated artist statement and perused through the user forums.

I was unable to play the game due to the limitations of my operating system. I think the creator makes some valid points in defense of his creation.

In all honesty, I feel that the controversy around this game is not really about censorship.

The organizers of Slamdance had every right to pull this game from competition. In my opinion, true censorship would be any local, state and or federal authority taking down the creator's site and placing him in jail for the simple act of creating a piece of controversial art. The site is still up, the game is still receiving attention, it was simply pulled from a competition. This is not censorship, this was the exercise of a choice, not the etermination of a right.

In the end, I'm glad I wasn't able to play this game. I have enough memories from that day, private thoughts and emotions. I grew up in Littleton, still live in the area, and I can still recall the immeasurable amount of pain this tragedy caused my community.

I do not hail this game as revolutionary. It's yet another reminder of what was lost, just retold and regurgitated through a different medium. To this point as contained in the forums, the game creator references other games in the same vein such as Medal of Honor and Call of Duty.

I also wonder, for all of the staunch supporters of this work, would they have the same boldness to forward this game to the families, the survivors of this tragedy?

I feel, if there is such a need to reinvigorate dialogue on important issues that existed even prior to Columbine, I feel it is time to create something new, so that we can allow the departed and their loved ones a respectful measure of rest and reprieve.