Muslim Massacre 'Game' Gains Attention for Seeker

Okay, as I see it, games like Manhunt, Hitman and probably many more task you with the controversial role of a killer. Granted, this is a bit of an iffy subject, making it look like it is fine for anyone to act out the killing of another human.

BUT, these games are not citing prejudice against any particular group of people, which ensure that such games distance themselves from being racist (or whatever). Where these games sometimes cross the line is when the story in the game frames you as a killer of a specific group, but it could be argued that this is very similar to other media, where you are expected to understand that it is a story.

Now, it could said that games like Call of Duty are racist, after all, you are an army who's sole task is to wipe out the axis forces, primarily Germans. BUT, they are held in context as a reproduction of a war.

When it comes to Muslim Massacre, (I haven't played the game but I have seen a youtube video of it in action), the game has very clearly been developed with racism in mind. The exact same game could have been written with the word Muslim removed from the title and a few additional sprites and it wouldn't have been any less 'fun'.

In no way can it be said that killing a whole group of people based on religion/colour/creed/anything be considered acceptable in the manner depicted.

I understand that the line is a bit murky here as 'killing is killing' and yes, it is difficult to see why there isn't any hypocrisy but surely you can see the difference between the two?

Okay, I need to get down to the pub before somebody sits on my chair again. So, some perspective.

"Let's get drunk and go to the local closed down, top secret, hospital and slaughter nurses who have never harmed us and s**t!"

versus

"Let's get drunk and go down to the Muslim part of town (or where the coffee-coloured people live, cos they're all Muslims aren't they? Yeah, they are!) and beat the s**t out them cos they all bomberized our country all the time and s**t!"

Which do you feel the angry mob would respond to most?

And - as I learned to my cost at school during the IRA bombings of mainland UK - there is always an angry mob somewhere ready to kick the s**t out of you.

Back to my initial response though - both games are awful. And I've played both.

Cheers

Tim

---- Tim's Pomposity Rating is Currently Unrated Boo!! ---

Yes I can see the difference, but it is, as you say, murky. Essentially the message we're sending out as an industry/community is that it's okay to pretend to kill people for entertainment - in terms of a storyline like Manhunt, not the entertainment of playing a game itself - as long as you don't discriminate the victims. So it's okay to portray murder, but not racism/religious discriminiation.

I resent the implication that I'm included in that generalisation. And that generalisation exists because the majority of Muslims in this country would fit into a key demographic. I would also argue that that key demographic is doing far more to object to being hounded for being Muslims than they are in seeking out and eradicating extremism within their own communities, but that's a different debate.



Tim's Pomposity Rating is Currently Breaking Records!



Oh right. And when you played the Muslim Massacre game, did you feel the need to go out and kill any Muslims afterwards? Or does that argument not work this way around now for some reason?
.

Whoa down there schnide. If I was aiming at you personally, I would have said, "schnide, you lazy bigot!" However, this is an interesting little moral maze we've all staggered into, and I don't think you're a lazy bigot. I was drawing attention to the kind of mobs who, for example, spend one day screaming, "Get that coon off the footy pitch!" until he scores a hattrick for their team.

You, schnide, are an over-sensitive bastard! :-)



Eh? I didn't do that. I actually went back to my flat and, on passing the Muslim gentleman who lives over the road, said "Evening squire" as I usually do. He said, "Evening"... and then I played some SPORE.

What way round do you mean? I'm getting lost in your argument. My statements were quite simply that one game is likely to inflame existing bigotry. The other isn't.

Tim

---- Tim's Pomposity Rating is Apparently an Ultra-Awesome 99.99% ----

Yeah? Well fuc.. oh I see. Yes you're probably right.



Daily Mail: GTA is wrong, you get to kill people!
Game industry: GTA isn't wrong, we know it isn't real and don't go out to murder prostitutes after we've played it.

Daily Mail: Muslim Massacre is wrong, you get to kill Muslims! (Although actually we probably like that more than we admit)
Game industry: Muslim Massacre isn't wrong, we know it isn't real and don't go out and.. oh hang on, no it is wrong (but the only people debating why are currently on SPOnG's forum. Let's give those people some high paid jobs in positions of power. And some cake).

With me now? That's the confusion I'm seeing.

In the meantime, I get your argument. What that also seems to be saying is that it's not the killing that's wrong, just the inflammation of bigotry. if you had a game where you killed Christians, Muslims and Jews, how would you feel about that?

I nevertheless retain the argument that the industry has a responsibility not to put games like Manhu.. okay games of questionable moral worth, so that when games like Muslim Massacre come out we can unquestionably refute them, rather than have a moral fog like this one.
.

In that case, so does other media, like film for example.... so no more rambo sequels.... oh, may as well smack the music industry too.... so no more questionable hip hip (yay)....

Hang on, I'm hearing cries of free speech now? Where is that noise coming from?

Looks to Tim :-P

I'd love to see no more questionable hip hop - "I live for money and beat ma hoes!" - and somehow that's acceptable? Tim Westwood can open his show with a song that has an endless loop of firing uzi's and that's alright? Actually no it's not alright, but as long as someone's making money out of it then they'll be arguing otherwise - just like Manhunt 2.

Bizarrely, I think Rambo 4 actually portrayed war in a far more responsible fashion than anything like Commando. And of course, who Rambo was killing in that film were the bad guys who'd murdered innocent villagers.

But you can't bring in the argument that Manhunt lets you kill other prisoners who had also done wrong, because you can kill anyone in GTA. So that doesn't wash.

I genuinely think this should be explored as an argument - this isn't for the sake of it. What are we saying is right and wrong to portray in games?
.

Look, I am trying to get down to the bloody pub okay, stop reeling me in.

At no point have I called for a ban on any game. Never will. Censoring is really just a convenient way for any organisation to get away with not funding education.

Killing people is - by and large - wrong (I'm of the mind that if someone was to have come at my daughter with the intention of damaging her, I'd kill them).

Thinking about and play-acting killing people is something that we all do. It is much easier to fall over the edge from play-acting and thinking into actually doing if you have a large mob or a powerful authority behind you all supporting that act.

Although open to question in terms of method, the Stanford Prison Experiment, Solomon Asch's conformity experiments and the Milgram experiment all indicate this.

That's my worry about MM.... large mob of bigots and scared people all feeling supported and then pressurising other people into bashing the coffee-coloured people... or Catholics or Jews or Hindus or .... anybody else with an invisible, fantasy friend.

In terms of freedom of speech, well, calling 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre when there isn't a fire still strikes me and Oliver Wendell Holmes as a dodgy idea.

Now, is it okay if I go to the pub and start a fight yet?

-------- Tim Has Attained Total Pomposity! Tim has Attained Total Pomposity! ----

Okay! I've opened my Newcastle Brown and Absinthe at my desk.

The portrayal of anything at all is acceptable in video games. There we go, I've said it.

Criticising is too.

So is not buying it.

So is boycotting it.

What is unacceptable is not educating people to the extent that they are able differentiate between thought and deed. I love American Psycho, Goya's The Disasters of War, Kill the Poor by the Dead Kennedys, Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal, Syndicate, Canon Fodder... everything from rape, cannibalism of babies, murder, warfare and calls to kill large groups of people are in that lot.

By showing our darker sides and enabling us to question them, all these things can be of positive use.

The subject matter isn't often the issue here. The reasoning is.

Did anybody see the perspective link we put at the bottom of the original story?

Cheers

Tim

------ NEW POMPOSITY RECORD ACHIEVEMENT!!! -----

...........................

Hey, his sig looks familiar from somewhere on the Internet (and even his programming partner sounds and looks familiar, I used to live in Brisbane).

http://www.indiegames.com/blog/2008/01/interview_linkdead_developers.html

Yeah, he's at Transhumandesign but why give more publicity than... well, I decided to.

Having lived in NSW for nearly a decade, I have to withdraw from any comments on what being in Qld can do to a person.*

(I also lived in Darwin... so, go figure).

Cheers

Tim

*Mad as cut-snakes all of them.

Did someone say "cake"?

I love cake! wheres cake?

(can we talk about video games aswell or will that upset the folks in the phillosphy librerary???)

Hugz to schnidey!