Talk:Super Columbine Massacre RPG!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

Contents

[edit] Discussion

With regard to the criticism that's been leveled at this game (and, subsequently, its Wikipedia artcle), did it ever occur to anyone that the controversy its generated attests to it being a thought-provoking piece of art?

[edit] Quick Question

Mentioned throughout the game are the initials NEK. I'm guessing they refer to a movie, but does anyone know what they mean? Yaanu 04:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe NBK for Natural Born Killers?DBaba 01:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
This guy's right. The initials aren't NEK, they are NBK, and they do stand for "Natural Born Killers", which they were quite the fans of. VolatileChemical 04:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nintendo or Super Nintendo?

This is a gamer's minor nitpick, but the article mentions how the game's quality is reminiscent of a Nintendo title from the 1980s. RPG Maker 2000 games more closely resemble games for the Super Nintendo, with the greatly increased amount of colors displayed on the screen, the use of sequenced music with more than four tracks, etc.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.163.100.12 (talk • contribs)

Agreed. The design is clearly closer to (somewhat superior than, though it doesn't make good use of its potential) SNES. --Kizor 17:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. The game is reminiscent of the 1992-1994 era of SNES games. --Justin 13:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Game is in the Headlines

Somebody should add that a recent college shooter claimed to have loved this game. It was on the news (today the 14th of September). I'd do it myself, but I'd rather trust people who are better capable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.211.69.98 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 14 September 2006

Maybe its more noteworthy that they could easily have been inspired by this game. Fuck, and people wonder why theres so much fucking violence for God's sake. What's wrong with these idiots?!WizardofOskemen 00:44, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Play the game, and then tell me it inspires violence. See pictures of Eric and Dylan dead will turn people away. The game is composed to 16 bit sprites, menus, and philosophy. The ones who come with a bloodlust will surely not be interested. Pogo 18:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Pogo on this (BTW, are you the same Pogogunner mod on the SCMRPG forums..?) it's perhaps possible to be inspired by this game, but jack thompson (f'ng dickhead) mentioned that a high school killer had TRAINED on this game.

they'd look pretty damn stupid going into a school and Shooting somone, letting the person hit them back and doing everything turnbased. drop down menus, sprite animations....

how the hell in gods earth do you "practice" a school shootout on this..?

JackOfTheGreen

People need to realize this game wasn't made to show the audience as much about school shootings as much as it was made to be what is actually is... a video game. A form of entertainment. Read the article in the old issue of game informer about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.219.73.66 (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Actual Rating?

Is there anywhere this game was rated on it's actual gameplay? I played it all the way through and aside from the obvious controversy, it really wasn’t a very good game, game-play wise. Is there any available site that rated it?Chewbacca1010 22:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

From what i read the gameplay (without the controversy) is a love it or hate it tpye of thing. Father Time89 23:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  • PC World ranked it #2 in "The 10 Worst Games of All Time." Here's some of what they had to say "Whether Ledonne's site has any constructive value whatsoever is still up in the air. But as a game, Super Columbine Massacre RPG is appalling." Drew30319 23:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV

DBaba: I felt that your edits reflected a strong bias toward the subject of this article.

  • Relevant quotes that were negative had been removed.
  • The name of the victim from the Dawson College Shootings was removed.
  • The #2 listing by PC World of "The 10 Worst Games of All Time" was relegated to nearly the bottom of the article.
  • The quote from Ledonne in which he stated "...it was about time." in referring to the Columbine Massacre, was also removed.
  • etc.

It was difficult to clearly follow your intention as your changes were made in 42 edits in one day. I see that most of the pertinent information has been re-added and am more comfortable with the tone of the article now. Drew30319 00:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Drew,
  • I added the PC World Worst Games note in my recent edits. It was not a part of the article prior to my recent edits, so I don't think I could have been "relegating" it anywhere.
  • By moving it to the first paragraph, you effectively distort the popularity of the game. Descriptions of both success and lousiness belong alongside each other: by opting to highlight an extremely negative opinion in the opening, you seem to have tipped the balance of the opening toward a preferred perspective.
  • The parsing of "it's about time" is just wrong. The quote is cut up to distort his words and deliver an "initial reaction" that is not Ledonne's, at least not according to the cited article.
  • The name of the victim of the Dawson College Shootings is irrelevant, but I certainly don't object if you insist. Perhaps we should also insert Castaldo's name, so we're not just naming the negative opinions.
  • It is crucial to distinguish between people who have played the game and hate it, and people who have heard about a "game" and hate the idea of trivializing tragedy.DBaba 04:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PC World rating ref. in intro is POV

The introduction for these articles are for a description of the defining factors of an article. If we put in this PC World thing, we're saying that that is a defining factor. We can say it's highly controversial, we can say that some people think it trivializes murder and the lives of innocent, but I think that the fact that PC World declared the game #2 on its list of "The 10 Worst Games of All Time" should definitely be removed. Either that, or add in an equivalently complimentary reference along with it. Who's with me? VolatileChemical 04:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The same could then be said about the Best Picture Award at the Oscars, right? POV is inherent in any "best of" classification. What isn't POV however is the fact that it was listed in PC World as one of "The 10 Worst Games of All Time." If another leading publication has listed it as one of the best games then by all means that should be included as well. CuriousGiselle 18:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I object to the location of the PC comment in the opening. I think it should be balanced out in the opening, or moved to its proper context. Must remain, must not remain as is.DBaba 22:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Introduction

The introduction stated that this game "recreates and examines the 1999 Columbine High School shootings.." (emphasis mine). We should not try to let ourselves be lured into thinking that this game had some pretentions with regard to finding out what really happened. There was an important scientific study done after the massacre, that did examine what happened, and this game is partly based on that study. It merely recreates with great detail the events of that day, and we should not give it credit for something it doesn't do. I changed the intro accordingly. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 18:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"It merely recreates with great detail the events of that day" Reinoutr, that's just a completely false statement. Just looking at the pictures on the page of the entry, that alone should relieve you of that misconception.DBaba 19:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes I looked at the pictures. So the game also includes a "Hell" and an "Isle of Lost Souls", where they "meet several fictional characters and dead celebrities". Can you explain how that is "examining" the massacre? --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 07:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Go read the artist's statement. The "pretentions" are laid out quite clearly there, so it'd be quite difficult for you to deny that the game at least has pretensions. Or you could try actually *gasp!* playing through the project yourself, so that you don't sound so foolish arguing about it on this talk page.
Seriously, I don't have it in me to adequately address your feelings. That instinct of yours to condemn, without any knowledge base whatsoever, and indeed right into the face of the most obvious truths about the project, that's normal, is the problem. That's why it's so hopeless for me to continue to tolerate this back and forth any further. Get your act together or don't, the next guy's instinct will prompt a similar debasing of the article.DBaba 02:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I already had read the artist statement. I am not denying he had pretentions to shock people, to get discussion going and make a statements. But he is not examining what happened. Maybe we are just discussing semantics here, but the author himself states that he tried to stay true to what happened, and in addition he added fantasy parts. Nowhere he claims that he made the game to examine and understand what happened. And please try to address my comment rather than calling me foolish. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 06:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sick

who would make something like that inless they were sick in the head? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.243.91 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 20 April 2007

What does this have to do with an encyclopedia?
Also, I find it a great addition--it's a horrible game, gameplay-wise, but it's essentially the movie "Dahmer" except in game format with a different event. It lets you look at the event from all perspectives, why they did it, instead of people just brushing them off with a "they were friggin' psycho" dismissal. TerminusEst13 15:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV paragraph

The following paragraph seems to be presenting it's own arguments and doesn't seem to be attributed to anyone other than whoever wrote it. Thus I removed it.

Furthermore, SCMRPG! is no different to any other video game based on real-world scenarios involving real victims of violence. Many of the video games sold and played today are based on conflicts in the Middle East; the 'enemy' invariably are people of Middle Eastern extraction, while the destruction of civilian buildings/areas/infrastructure are also incorporated into the gameplay. Despite this, such games are popular, socially-acceptable and have generated minimal controversy over the killing (direct or implied) of people with real-world counterparts. Thus, outrage over SCMRPG! may stem primarily from the fact that the game portrays real American citizens as the enemy. Critics who consider SCMRPG! as 'poor taste' (or similar) due to the subject matter should, therefore, be careful that they are not speaking from a position of prejudice.

--Foot Dragoon 06:34, 25 April 2007 (UTC)