Postal 2 to be featured in Nobel Prize museum

by Griffin McElroy { Jan 28th 2009 at 4:24PM }

We'd wager that the first time the gaming community collectively booted up Running With Scissors' Gary Coleman-rich urination sim, Postal 2, we all shared the same thought: that this game absolutely needs to be showcased in some sort of museum commemorating mankind's greatest accomplishments. If memory serves, many of the title's reviews included similar sentiments.

Finally, that observation is being realized. Sweden's Nobel Museum, whose galleries are littered with installations denoting the achievements of Nobel laureates (as well as the life of the prize's progenitor, Alfred Nobel), will be including Postal 2 in a new exhibit titled "Freedom of Speech: How Free is Free?" The game will be included in a section that focuses on censorship in the video game industry. We're really happy such an exhibit exists; we just wish they'd picked a ... well, a good controversial game.

Tags: censorship, freedom-of-speech, museum, nobel-museum, postal-2

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

offday @ Jan 28th 2009 4:31PM

It's kind of depressing watching washed up child stars, now adults, try to do anything they can to be back in the spotlight again.

player66 @ Jan 28th 2009 4:33PM

Keeping in mind this is a game where the developers had the foresight to include animations for an NPC reacting to being urinated on with appropriate and gag-inducing hit detections. This is the 2 girls 1 cup of videogames.

Dirty @ Jan 28th 2009 4:37PM

I think that this would be more appropriate and interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Columbine_Massacre_RPG!

It certainly is cause for much more dialog.

The Espiritu (Viva La Joystiq!) @ Jan 28th 2009 5:08PM

That was in 2005 Dirty, but is actually more interesting than this.

Strategy_Panda (Pot & Spoon 4 Life) @ Jan 28th 2009 4:40PM

I'm kind of glad the game is getting some publicity. I always liked the devs

Moptimus Slime (Leader of the Ryan Scott Defense Force, Ultrastiq Revolutionary) @ Jan 28th 2009 4:41PM

wow, its surprising how much of the world still has no idea the difference between actual controversy and "Look! You can pee on some dude! We're so edgy and controversial!! Please write about us!"

Sir Buzz Killington( The Artist formerly known as Jakka) @ Jan 28th 2009 4:44PM

Why?

I think Postal makes a much better example for such exhibit than any other controversial game, aside from Columbine RPG, Dirty mentioned.

Haggard @ Jan 28th 2009 6:16PM

But it's controversy for controversy's sake. There's no reason you can piss on people, or use cats as gun silencers (in the new one?); it's just there to whip up a media frenzy and in the process whip up sales figures.

A game that explores controversial themes as a device for wider social commentary or philosophical implications is far more worthy as an example in a debate on freedom of speech.

johngreg843 @ Feb 20th 2009 2:33PM

Mixed feelings about this one - I like that video games are being seen as important cultural expressions, but this seems kind of negative, especially in light of the game they chose. Like Griffin says there are much better - and controversial - games out there. I just hope the video game exhibit doesn't go next to the neo-nazi sheet music exhibit.

Geoffrey Sperl @ Jan 28th 2009 5:01PM

"...we just wish they'd picked a ... well, a good controversial game."

No, you don't.

A good game would stand on its own merits as it is a good game. GTA: San Andreas is well worth playing and, therefore, it can stand on its own against its critics.

Postal 2, however, has to rely on the Larry Flynt argument of freedom of speech. Therefore, it may be degrading, poorly done, and generally disregarded, but it is still covered as allowable within the concept of free speech.

It is generally the stuff we dislike that we have the hardest time making the argument that they are covered under free speech, but they will fail in the end because of the message they deliver.

In the end, we can't discriminate by way of taste as to what deserves recognition in this sort of forum - we have to allow all of it or allow none of it.

Farseer (GDI) @ Jan 28th 2009 5:04PM

Well said, sir. Well said.

Josh @ Jan 28th 2009 8:21PM

"It is generally the stuff we dislike that we have the hardest time making the argument that they are covered under free speech, but they will fail in the end because of the message they deliver."

Wait, I don't understand that sentence.

Anyway, yes, I do agree that free speech (and press, etc.) has no limits, unless of course someone is being forced into something against their will (like real-life child pornography).

Geoffrey Sperl @ Jan 28th 2009 8:41PM

Yeah, I was at work and a little rushed.

Generally, I was getting at the idea that, while it's difficult for us to defend something like Postal 2 under the auspices of "free speech" because we don't like it, the reality is that, if it's not worthwhile, it'll fail on its own - no censorship required.

Josh @ Jan 28th 2009 10:42PM

That's about right.

And besides, I'd rather default to the "no censorship" side than risk any damage that could be done *with* censorship.

BigD145 @ Jan 28th 2009 5:09PM

Does GTA allow you to urinate on cops and set them afire?

BananaBoat @ Jan 28th 2009 5:27PM

latter yes, former no

MuToiD_MaN @ Jan 28th 2009 5:12PM

"Only my weapon understands me."
Great quote ... or BEST quote?

Deck @ Jan 28th 2009 5:35PM

*sigh* I guess it IS good that such a exhibit does exist. Means they are at least thinking of us.

Though as you say, be nice if it was a different game perhaps.

BananaBoat @ Jan 28th 2009 5:48PM

LBP comes to mind for the whole lyrics censorship thing. Decent, family friendly game, censored because of lyrics that maybe 0.001% of the games target audience could understand anyway. It wasn't a big deal until they made it a big deal, just like most of the things they've censored in the past (Hot Coffee for instance. You had to mod the freaking game to even see that mini-game, yet it caused a full blown recall at a cost of millions of real dollars.)

It's such a shame that stores absolutely will not carry AO rated games. Why should retail outlets be able to dictate what content I can and cannot see? It's crazy, especially considering that AO games flow out of Japan like candy, and their country hasn't gone mad with sexual hysteria yet (on the contrary....their birth rate is in a free fall).

I'm so annoyed that they chose Postal 2 of all games to be in the exhibit. Normal people would take one look at it, and think that the censors are right in what they are doing.

Haggard @ Jan 28th 2009 6:22PM

There's at least a billion muslims in the world - and some of the richest countries are muslim countries. Standard of living in the middle east, Turkey, and Afghanistan is high enough that a decent sized number of people might be targeted by this game. And as one that stands apart from violent or controversial themes, it's even more likely to be acceptable.

The thing is, to Muslims any transformation of the Koran into musical lyrics is forbidden. And if you realise that your game has the potential to break a religious law of a large chunk of the world's human biomass, recalling it is a fairly logical step.

BananaBoat @ Jan 29th 2009 11:13AM

Meh. Games have been known to assault my religion, and I've never thrown a fit over it.

Shagittarius @ Jan 28th 2009 5:57PM

While this game wasn't a great game most of the reviews were a kneejerk reaction to the violence present in the video game. I think this game is actually a good choice for the 'freedom of speech' exhibit. It certainly took knocks from reviews presenting a side of free speech they didn't want to see.