[...] OUT RALPH KOSTER’s piece on this — Raph Koster has spoken up on the subject. it’s a smart, cogent look at what’s happening surrounding this controversy: here is the excerpt from [...]

[...] in protest of game’s expulsion, I have dropped Braid out of the competition as well. Raph Koster has spoken up on the subject. Dismissing the game “on moral grounds” essentially argues that it is exploitative; yet we do not [...]

[...] I recall being impressed with the jury at the annual Slamdance indie festival late last year when the finalists for their game of the year category were announced. Way down at the bottom, apparently below anyone’s radar, was the hugely controversial title Super Columbine Massacre RPG, a game – to paraphrase the developer’s stated intentions – aimed at sparking debate, engendering understanding in the violence and videogames issue and exploring the boundaries of the interactive art form.Unfortunately, it looks like someone has developed cold feet.Water Cooler Games and Kotaku both report that the game has been removed from the list due to pressure from festival sponsors. However, a follow-up post at WCG suggests that the decision to remove the game was a personal choice on the part of the organiser rather than due to corporate demands.The froth which is unfurling is covered in detail at WCG, including links to intelligent analysis and updated information. Raph points to a Newsweek article which highlights the hypocrisy in the decision, as the festival has previously shown Gus Van Sant’s Elephant, a film which deals with the same subject.As of Monday, at least one other finalist has pulled his game out of the competition in protest. Slamdance begins 18 January. [...]

[...] Even if what is and is not art is a matter of opinion (and I don’t think it is), it doesn’t follow that a contest should allow anything at all to be a part of it. The phrase “excluded from consideration” is inexact? Do you mean from consideration in any forum whatsoever? As in, if I were running an art contest, and someone submitted something which I’d identify as blasphemous and evil, like Piss Christ, I’d be morally obliged to let it be considered in my contest? I don’t think you mean this, but you would have to be making a claim this strong for your argument to work. Otherwise, why would the head of this contest be obliged to keep the Columbine game in? If the complaint is that it wasn’t kicked out until it was late in the contest, well, that’s fair – but that’s just sloppiness on the part of the people running the contest, or perhaps the head of the contest was not directly aware of the content of the game. Or was he just hoping to not cause a scene because he assumed it would not get very far? My money is on this last one, personally. I think we’re getting mired down in debating the quality of the game which isn’t really the point. The game was fairly entered and well received enough by the judges to make it to the finalist’s round. The game was then outed by a higher-up because he disagreed with all the judges’ decisions and felt he had a moral obligation to step in and banish the game because it dealt with sensitive issues and was afraid of what would happen if it was kept in the contest. This has resulted in aggrevating the judges, the finalists, and game designers at large not because a crappy game was kicked out of a little contest but because of the act removing it based on the the nature of the issues it deals with symbolizes. As a medium we have to stand up for our ability to create games about all issues, even if they’re particularly unsettling ones. Whether this game is “art” or not; whether the game is “good” or not is irrelevant. It was outed from the competition because either it dealt with a subject matter that was perceived to be too sensitive for games to touch properly, or the interactive nature of a game merged with the important subject matter transformed an otherwise interesting subject into a taboo. And if either of these are seen as true, we’re totally hosed as a medium. [...]

[...] Of recent news is the 2007 Slamdance Guerrilla Gamemaker Competition currently suffering from the aftermath of a decision to withdraw controversial game Super Columbine Massacre RPG from the roster of finalists. A number of finalists have seized the opportunity to voluntarily pull out from the competition citing concerns about artistic merit… [...]

Free speech applies wherever you want it to.

I don’t think it works that way, but I’m certainly no human rights maven. I’m a big fan of the medley you point out. If Slamdance did something that people and companies find objectionable then companies can pull their games and individuals can not attend.

It’s still consent of the governed, in a way.

I think you meant: “Public sphere? I thought there were sponsors footing the bill.”

Since it’s not in the public sphere, I don’t think ‘Free Speech’ applies. If Mr. Koster moderates my comment into the bit bucket, he hasn’t infringed on my right to ‘Free Speech’. It’s his soapbox, not mine.

[...] Když byla kontroverzní freewarovka Super Columbine Massacre RPG! vybrána minulý rok v listopadu mezi 14 finalistů soutěže Slamdance Guerilla Gamemaker Competition, která se bude konat od 18. do 27. ledna souběžně se známým filmovým festivalem Slamdance v Utahu, tak to na tvářích spousty lidí vyvolalo údiv. Byl to vzhledem k kontroverzitě hry od pořadatelů skutečně odvážný, ale rozhodně správný tah, za nějž si vysloužili jednoznačnou pochvalu. Tehdy na konci roku však ještě nikdo netušil, že na začátku roku 2007 bude všechno jinak. Ačkoli to pak bylo popřeno a interpretováno jinak, tak kvůli tlakům sponzorů festivalu byli pořadatelé nuceni Super Columbine Massacre RPG! vyřadit, čehož sami litovali. Spoluzakladatel festivalu Peter Baxter prohlásil, že kontroverzní hru Dannyho Ledonneho vyřadil nerad (prohlásil, že to je špatně), ale musel to prý udělat z morálního hlediska a kvůli přežití festivalu. Danny Ledonne přijal tuto nepříjemnou informaci takříkajíc s klidem, ačkoli mohl působit méně odevzdaně a mohl bojovat.Naštěstí se tvůrci několika, ze zbylých 13 do finále vybraných, titulů rozhodli bojovat namísto Ledonneho, byť se mnoha z nich Super Columbine Massacre RPG! vlastně ani nelíbí (ona ta hra stejně není o tom, aby se někomu líbila). Tak například tvůrce plošinovky Braid Jon Blow na svém blogu prohlásil, že sice v SCMRPG chybí jakýkoli soucit a odkaz hry je tedy neúplný, ale to nic nemění na tom, že hra má i své světlé stránky a rozhodně nutí lidi přemýšlet nad důležitými otázkami. Jinak řečeno, posunuje hranice toho, za co jsou hry považovány, do sféry umění. Hra tedy na festival patří a Blow se proti jejímu vyřazení rozhodl protestovat tím, že z festivalu odhlásil svůj titul Braid.Podobně, tedy stažením své hry z finálové účasti na festivalu (jen abyste věděli, tak jde o budoucí PS3 titul flOw), zareagoval Kelee Santiago. Podle něj se prý názory na kvalitu SCMRPG i téma, kterým se hra zabývá, mohou lišit, ale jedno je jasné – Super Columbine Massacre RPG! na festival patří. Za to, že SCMRPG na festival patří se svým hlasem postavila i celá řada dalších lidí, včetně Rapha Kostera, Iana Bogosta a dvojice vítězů předchozího ročníku Slamdance festivalu (Andrew Stern a Michael Mateas), kteří pořadatelům napsali otevřený dopis, v němž žádají, aby byl titul SCMRPG znovu zařazen mezi finalisty. Uvidíme, jak to celé dopadne, respektive zdali pořadatelé tlaku podlehnout. Ať už to dopadne jakkoli, tak je celý tento humbuk nesmírně prospěšný, protože rozvířil debatu o tom, co jsou to vlastně hry, jakou úlohu plní a mohou plnit v dnešní společnosti a konečně, jestli lze hry označit za umění. [...]