Year-old religious fighting game angering the religious

by Alexander Sliwinski on Apr 28th 2009 1:31AM

Metro.co.uk has dug up some religious outrage over an aging, online game called Faith Fighter. The Flash-based title, released in January 2008, allows players to control various deities battling for ... "intolerance" of one another. In the "censored" version of the game, Muhammad's face is covered by a black circle. The Metro piece gives voice to certain representatives of various religions who are offended by the game, which does pre-load with this (perhaps sarcastic) disclaimer:

"This game is not intended to be offensive towards any religion in particular. Its aim is to push the gamers to reflect on how the religions and sacred representations are often instrumentally used to fuel or justify conflicts between nations and people ... If you feel that such a depiction [of Muhammad] would be offensive ... don't play the game at all."

Interestingly, Adult Swim's Bible Fight is essentially based on the same concept and has been playable since May 2, 2007. Granted, that game only picks on Judeo-Christian icons. Still, if we were a religious group expressing outrage (hint, hint), we'd at least direct our disgust at a mega-corporation (see The Church of England vs. Sony), you know, uh, to recoup some damages. Seriously, how do you expect little old Molleindustria.org to respond to the Faith Fighter backlash? Our best guess: a sequel starring new challenger Haile Selassie I.

[Via GamePolitics]

Source

Tags: faith-fighter, flash, molleindustria, religion

Reader Comments (104)

See, nobody would care if Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, or any other religious group were offended - the only reason the Muslims' offense at this kind of thing is because the tend to shoot back.

Did you read the source (which for some reason isn't the actual source, you must check the source of the source to get to the source... If you want the source I'm referring to, go here: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Calls_to_ban_online_game_of_Holy_hatred&in_article_id=635709&in_page_id=34)?

Multiple groups are making statements here, not just the one.

We really need to stop caring so much about offending Muslims. If they can't stand to have their icons lampooned and go all crazy and murder people every time one is, they have no business living free societies, like America or Europe. Truth is, if we don't stand up to them soon, they'll just get worse and worse. Sure not all Muslims are like this, but too few of them protest when their leaders call for the deaths of anyone critical of Islam or when their fellow Muslims riot over a few harmless cartoons. There are vile antisemitic, cartoons reminiscent of Nazi Germany printed just about every day in the middle east, and you don't see significant numbers of Jews rioting over them, anywhere in the world.

Another asshole on Joystiq.

@Damien

Godwin sends his regards.

@Prem

http://www.ukchurch.org/churchdetails.php?churchid=4362 That's the church of the ONE Christian they quote, a pastor over what I would guess to be 150 members. I'm a Christian, I know churches, and I can tell you this guy probably immediately forgot about the game after the reporter emailed him a link to it and trolled for his reaction. Because that's obviously what happened. No small church pastor is going to spend the time making noise about something so lame and irrelevant to his congregation. He has events to plan, sermons to write, and probably lowered giving in this financial climate to worry about.

@chispito

If this was a few days ago, I wouldn't have understood the Godwin comment. Now that I finally do though, I smiled like this -> :-)

Dude, I think people all have the ability to be an asshole equally. Their religion just happens to confuse martyrdom with homicide more often right now. Maybe you should play the game and get the point.

Christians are use to being poked fun at. The majority of us just ignore it. Yet we're suppose to be tolerant of the other religions that go crazy from anything at all.

Hey just remember, even Kevin Smith refused to make a Dogma 2 that would poke fun of Muslims because he "has a family now" and didn't want them to be killed because of a bunch of silly jokes.

You do have to admit, the Muslim faith is a bit nuts when it comes to people making fun of it. And yet no one does anything..

mgsrocks1,
chispito,
Rob Bourne,

I'm not saying anything alone the lines of kill every Muslim on the planet. I'm fully aware of the fact that not all of them are Jihadists. We can be glad that some of them are non violent and don't support barbaric things like Sharia. But until a majority of them openly condemn violence in the name of their religion, and attempts to force people to embrace their faith, we will have good reason to be nervous.

Now here's a website devoted to reporting on acts of Terrorism and other depraved acts committed in the name of Islam.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Look over it, if you think I'm being a bigot.

Orion,

You wrote,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey just remember, even Kevin Smith refused to make a Dogma 2 that would poke fun of Muslims because he "has a family now" and didn't want them to be killed because of a bunch of silly jokes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I never heard that before. However, If that's true, I'm not surprised, we really have to stop letting religious fanatics bully us like this.

"You do have to admit, the Muslim faith is a bit nuts when it comes to people making fun of it. And yet no one does anything.. "
No one does anything? Then why the hell have we been sitting around in Iraq for the past 5 years?

DBuck_Eye,

Orion, was talking about standing up to Muslims, probably primarily in non Muslims societies who get enraged whenever their religion is criticized. The Iraq war is something else entirely. We didn't go to war to over through Saddam over the Danish Cartoons, we went to war, in Iraq because it was believed that Saddam was working on weapons of mass destruction and fear he might use them.

And by the way, anyone who wants to tell me Bush Lied, people died, needs to look at the facts. Saddam Used Chemical weapons on his own people, and Clinton kept demanding he let weapons inspectors in and he kept refusing. Than Bush came along and based on the intelligence he had, decided to act.

Damien:

My comment had nothing to do with what you said, it was about Godwin's Law, which I only discovered recently.

JESUS FUCKING HELL!!!
It's always something to bitch about with these religious groups.

...

Yeah? no? see what I did there? hmm?*

*this comment might or might not have been made under the influence of alcohol.

Oh hey, the guy who made this talked at my school. He was a pretty bizarre fellow to be honest. He said he was currently in a legal battle with the Vatican if I recall correctly. His site is here: http://www.molleindustria.org/ and he has alot of other political flash games.

Reading comprehension?

First off, that link is in the article.

Second, he posted this on the site:

- So far we received a couple of letters of complaints from individual catholic players but NO communications from any religious organization.

So... yeah... how does that work with a legal battle against the Vatican?

Because he might be in a legal battle with the Vatican over something else?

I can understand how religious people can be outraged. I mean, just look at how well religious people treat others, especially those of another faith.

Remember when Jesus said turn the other cheek, I'm sure that only applied to everything but video games.

And yeah, behead those who insult islam, that'll learns them who's peaceful.

And I bet Buddha has something to say about people who dabble in things that effect them negatively, don't.

And I bet the Budai really cares about a game that is meant for simple pleasure.

And I'm sure Ganesha would find it wise to care about someone's game.

But hey, what do I know, I'm just a Daoist.

I love how it seems that Christians are the ones who are most likely to act un-Christian in these types of situations.

I think the other groups would be acting un-Christian at all times. Being not Christian and all...

Who said anything about beheading people? Most of you make it sound as if Christians and Jews have been saints through out history. Did you pay attention in History class?

He's just making the point that ALL religions do whatever the hell they want, whether justified or not, and then cry foul when somebody minorly insults them in a flash game.

To group all religious people into your stereotypes makes you an idiot.

Just because I'm anal, one who practices Taoism is a Taoist. When you speak it, though, it is pronounced Daoism or Daoist.

/The More You Know

When Jesus said to turn the other cheek, he meant that if someone does something against a Christian, that the Christian is better to forgive him instead of following the 'eye for an eye' route. That is different than blasphemy which is against God, not man, but even then it is better to do it by peaceful means of forgiveness.

Learn to take things in context before you start quoting scripture.

Farseer, it's both Taoism and Daoism, but also neither. I use "D" because that's the modern pinyin but if you use "T" that's cool too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daoism-Taoism_Romanization_issue

/The more YOU know.

Mr. Mobius, If one blasphemes against Christ, that would be an affront to all Christians as well, yes?

And finally, mgsrocks1, http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/5071/theirony.jpg

Sure it's not directly related to the game, but seriously, sometimes people need to calm down, and not care.

Haha. The good ole "context" defense. It's funny how when you point out the absurdities in the Bible, Christians come up with some convoluted explanation for "context" to justify it. Utter silliness. The mental acrobatics necessary to believe these ancient fairy tales is shameful.

Wow, thanks Kamizar. I can live my life feeling slightly less anal now.
I love the harmony of both parties being right. It's almost "balanced" yes? :)

Farseer, let's just say the T and D exist together, and when necessary the T can become a D, and the D can become a T.

Yeah I see the link is in the article. The professor had to coax his admission out of him and he was somewhat embarrassed by it.

My bad, it was legal trouble regarding Pedopriest.

Dude, you can hit reply on your original comments. Making a new thread everytime is likely to piss people off, just so you know.

The Bible - screwing things up since 390 A.D.

People - believing in what other people tell them to believe since the Earth was flat.

Sheep need to be led.

Yeah... good thing the Bible wasn't there when, for example, the U.S. was founded. /sarcasm

Honestly, you think the Bible is the reason people waged those crusades? Really? Where in the Bible does it preach you should kill or persecute those who oppose Christianity?

Instead it should be... 'people: screwing things up since the beginning of time.' If people actually read and followed the Bible as they should, our society would be a lot better off. Go ahead and try to prove me wrong.

Where did you get the date AD 390?

The earliest book of the New Testament was probably James, and would have been written c. AD 50. The oldest books of the Old Testament were probably written at least a millennium earlier, even according to liberal scholarship.

Also, if you had done any kind of study on the impact the early church had on society, I do not think you would make that statement. The early church was notable for being charitable and nonviolent, and for advocating better gender, ethnic, and socioeconomic equality than you would have found elsewhere in the world.

Yes, but the Bible states if I sin against "god" then I will burn for eternity in Hell. And with that looming over everyone's heads - causes them to get a little looney. And once you throw in some prejudice and bigotry in the bible you got a recipe for disaster.

I've always said, if you believe in religion - then that is awesome for you. But keep it to yourself, if it helps you be a better person go for it. But once you start infiltrating Government and persuading Politics and stating that, "_____ people don't deserve _____" then it is time to step in and say, "Wait a minute! Let's not take this so seriously".

"I've always said, if you believe in religion - then that is awesome for you. But keep it to yourself, if it helps you be a better person go for it. But once you start infiltrating Government and persuading Politics and stating that, "_____ people don't deserve _____" then it is time to step in and say, "Wait a minute! Let's not take this so seriously"."

Infiltrating government? Because so many politicians have kept their views on social issues a secret until they are elected, at which point they dissolve the democratic process and unilaterally enact laws that fit their secret agenda.

What are you talking about? What excluding have you observed, and who are the chief culprits?

The US was founded as a secular nation, one of a tiny minority in the world.

You couldn't tell it by looking today, of course..

Cheeze, I'm not sure if your reply is serious or not after the sarcasm....

But if we read and followed the bible, there'd be a loooooooooot of dead people on Sunday.

> Where did you get the date AD 390?

While the earliest individual stories existed since the late first century (50AD earliest - 70AD), the Bible itself wasn't put together until 390AD. By a committee of men. Who couldn't even agree on the nature of Jesus and God (Aryan Controversy).

> The earliest book of the New Testament was probably James, and would have > been written c. AD 50. written at least a millennium earlier, even according to
> liberal scholarship.

So what? Doesn't make it true.

> Also, if you had done any kind of study on the impact the early church had on
> society, I do not think you would make that statement. The early church was
> notable for being charitable and nonviolent, and for advocating better gender,
> ethnic, and socioeconomic equality than you would have found elsewhere in the
> world.

This is such a laughable statement, I don't even know where to begin.

@Dogmatic

I don't see the relevance of when the canon was officially affirmed, either, other than to point out that Dark was mistaken. It wasn't cobbled together at the last moment and then voted on, they simply affirmed the books and letters that everyone had already come to use anyway. Given the way the books were written, as historical accounts and epistles, from different authors, at different times, in different places and to different audiences, it makes sense it would take a little while for them to disperse within the church.

Arius' views had some traction within his own circles, but the church soundly and decisively rejected them at Nicaea. Quoth wikipedia: "of the estimated 250–318 attendees, all but two voted against Arius."

Despite how the voting went at the Council of Nicea (who would vote in favor of
Arius when the penalty would be banishment by Constantine), the views of Arius
seem to be more widely held than you describe according to this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism

But this is really irrelevant. The fact is, the Bible was formed by a committee of men.
They voted on the books that would be included. In fact, they voted to reject certain
Gospels that were very popular and even more widely read than the standard 4
(Enoch, Thomas, etc). So, what you think happened and what really happened are
two very different things. The fact is, the Bible was created by men. No divine
intervention is required or even evident.

Oh, like you haven't seen our previous president stating openly about his religious views and garnering a huge support from religious nuts. Just watch Jesus Camp and be prepared to be scared. And when I was referring to political views I was mainly pointing out the fact of Gay Marriage and it's seemingly never ending battle with the "politics" of America.

The church didn't use the Gospel of Thomas. It was a gnostic work of later provenance that was clearly heretical. Also, despite Dan Brown's claims, it was also quite misogynistic. If you understand gnosticism at all, and understand Christian theology, you can see how it was something whipped up to support gnostic claims while drawing on Christian tradition. This is nothing new, as the Gospel of John appears to offer direct refutations to the proto-gnosticism of the day.

@chispito:

I recommend you take the time to watch Banned From The Bible on History Channel. They list tons of gospels that were popular at or before the time the Bible was put together that were rejected by the Council of Nycea.

Of course, you probably the think the History Channel is a liberal conspiracy.

I didn't say there weren't other purported gospels. I said they all appear to have been written substantially later, are theologically heretical to extant Scripture, and had no pull with the early churches. The canon wasn't collated by a bunch of men in a room, as you suggest, it came into being independently, among the churches. The church councils debated a little on a few of the books (Revelation and James come up fairly often) but the large majority of the New Testament, including the four gospels, had been established before then, independently, among the churches. They developed specific criteria in affirming canonicity, and none of those other books approach the criteria, including a requirement that the books be widely used by the church.

Instead of watching History Channel specials, try skimming a book by a real scholar, and see what really happened.

While I know that people as a whole need religion, I know that I don't. It's these kinds of squabbles, suicide bombings, banning of condoms, etc. that just make me detest the ultra-religious groups out there.

Being agnostic myself, I get along quite fine believing in what makes sense to me, and not forcing those beliefs onto other people. Discussing in polite conversation is fine, but being unable to accept one's art for the sake of entertainment? This almost has less to do with religion and more to do with the abject stupidity of those with nothing better to do.

| 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 50 Comments

Year-old religious fighting game angering the religious

Reader Comments (104)

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 1:39AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 1:59AM Premature ejaculation man said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:28AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:55AM Birth Canal said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:59AM chispito said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:50AM Rob Bourne said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 7:59AM borland502 said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 8:29AM anoffday said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 9:26AM HTCEVO said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 12:02PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 12:09PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:36PM DBuckEye said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 4:11PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 29th 2009 12:51PM Rob Bourne said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 1:42AM MystileArmor said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 1:52AM zim2411 said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 1:58AM MystileArmor said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 5:44AM Haggard said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 1:59AM Kamizar said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:06AM WiredKnight said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:39AM RobLink said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:07AM Birth Canal said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 5:50AM Haggard said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 8:32AM anoffday said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 10:21AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 10:58AM mrmobius said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 11:51AM Kamizar said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 11:53AM dogmaticatheist said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 12:11PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 12:23PM Kamizar said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:00AM zim2411 said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:03AM zim2411 said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:08AM MystileArmor said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:14AM DarknessBear said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:23AM arkweld said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:40AM Kanjou said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:15AM Cheezeman3000 said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:27AM chispito said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:29AM DarknessBear said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:47AM chispito said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 5:55AM Haggard said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 12:07PM Ignatius said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 12:36PM dogmaticatheist said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:04PM chispito said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:54PM dogmaticatheist said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:31PM DarknessBear said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 3:37PM chispito said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 5:56PM dogmaticatheist said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 8:10PM chispito said

Posted: Apr 28th 2009 2:38AM Kanjou said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

WB conjures up Harry Potter for Kinect this fall

Featured Stories

Weekly Webcomic Wrapup is a stranger in a strange land

Silver Lining: I Am Alive's unfeeling world

Game Of Thrones and the paradoxes of adaptation

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW