PC World has posted on their site five of the most offensive video games of the year. While I tend to agree with their choices, they go out of their way to state that these titles are just the first five. I suppose that means that there will be more revealed at a later date – and truth be told, there have been numerous titles released this year that can be considered offensive. Not offensive in the sense that bad breath is offensive, but offensive because of the assault on our highly tuned intellectual senses. At least that is what I found offensive about the games they listed. Anyway, here is the list in the order they posted it.

1. So You Think You Can Drive, Mel? – The GSN flash game based upon a lecherous drunk of a Mel Gibson where you collect bottles of tequila while dodging flying Stars of David thrown at you by a Rabi. Personally I found this hilarious instead of offensive. Nothing can be funnier than a little politically incorrect humor at the expensive of a high brow celebrity gone awry.
2. Manhunt 2 – Good Lord yes this game was offensive. With all the hype surrounding the bans and omissions of gruesome content, this game was nothing short of an all out sucky assault on every sense known to man. Just a bad, bad, bad game all around.
3. V-Tech Rampage – This flash game based upon the V-Tech shooting was just inconsiderate and down-right uncalled for. This guy needs his ass whipped for all eternity in Hell by none other than the idiot who went on the shooting spree, while being forced to watch Hitler dance to a Backstreet Boys song while wearing only a pink thong.
4. Kane & Lunch: Dead Men – PC World found this game mostly offensive because of the advertisement campaign looking for a half naked babe. What that had to do with the game was beyond everyone’s scope of thought, and it not only failed miserably, but also failed to help out the horribly executed game in any way shape or form.
5. Mario Party 8 - This title was offensive because of the use of the word “spastic” where over in the UK it is considered a derogatory comment for mentally challenged people; thus the game was pulled from shelves to be edited for content. Did any mentally challenged people get offended by the use of the word? Did any of them even play the game? We will never know, because Nintendo pulled the game immediately and reissued the game with the word “erratic” replacing the offensive word. I wonder if anyone finds the word “erratic” offensive.

Check out PC World’s full take on these games by visiting their website.

After maligning gamers with his rave on violent video games being the cause of the V-Tech massacre, a more reasonable cool headed Dr. Phil McGraw gave his impressions of Manhunt 2 on the CBS morning program The Early Show yesterday. His exposure to the game is through watching game journalist Scott Steinberg play the “Sexual Deviance” level of Manhunt 2 on the Wii.

Dr. Phil comments that the level of violence is “not good,” but admits that anyone who would actually commit the acts portrayed in the game had to have something very wrong with them to begin with.

Clearly, it’s not good. The research has been very, very strong over the years that when you’re exposed to violence and when you actually mimic something like this the aggression can go up.

Now the truth is, if somebody plays this game and then they go and do this in their life, there was something seriously wrong with them before they got the game. But it’s modeling.

Early Show anchor Harry Smith asks the inevitable question; What about children who get their hands on the game due to the lack of supervision or carelessness of an adult?

[The game is] in the house so the little kids can get it and, parents just have to be hyper-vigilant about it. This is not good modeling and it’s not good rehearsal. Now does that mean they’re going to go out and do this sort of thing? No, it doesn’t mean that, but it does desensitize them to it and they’re less sensitive when other people are that way.

Smith also hits the on the other much discussed issue of whether video game violence is any worse than movie violence especially when taking into account the motion sensitive Wii controls. Apparently it’s all a matter of perspective; first versus third:

Higher level of involvement. it’s just another level of getting closer to the violence…

via GamePolitics

Despite a Government report absolving video games as the cause of the V-Tech massacre, Lyndon LaRouche and his followers continue to preach against violence in video games, insisting they triggered killer Seung Hui Cho’s rampage.

Six families, whose relatives were killed in the VA Tech massacre in April, have retained a law firm which previously represented the families who lost members in the 1999 Columbine shootings, reported yesterday’s Washington Post…

Both Harris and Klebold were fanatical users of violent video games such as “Doom.”

…The VA Tech report touches on number of issues which could come out in full, in legal proceedings. These include Cho’s mental history, which was not made known to the University, and his addiction to killer video games.

GamePolitics is quick to point out that there is no mention of Cho’s being addicted to killer video games in the V-Tech Report. There is also no mention of video games in the Washington Post article LaRouche references in his tirade. The bizarre part is that LaRouche would reference the Post at all considering he accused the publication of a cover-up on the video game issue. JT isn’t the only … person out there using rhetoric to spread hate, lies and hysteria over video game violence.

via GamePolitics

Ian Bogost, Georgia Tech professor, author and co-founder of Persuasive Games is scheduled to appear on the Colbert Report tonight. Bogost is the same man that challenged the industry to make a sensitive thoughtful game on the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Bogost will be discussing his new book, Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Video Games. Those of you interested in the book can read the first chapter available at The MIT Press. He’ll also talk about some of the serious games Persuasive has created. The company specializes in games about social and political issues.

The Colbert Report airs tonight on Comedy Central at 8:30 EST.

Larouche  followers are claiming there is a cover-up involved in the Virginia Tech Report issued to the President. As we reported last week, there was no mention of video games in the report despite the efforts of Jack Thompson and Lyndon Larouche followers to convince the panel that violent video games were the cause of Cho’s murderous rampage.

The Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee has issued a statement on their website, accusing the video game industry of engineering a cover-up in the report. They claim the Game industry lobby sites are Games Industry and “Gammer Life”.

The irony here being that we’re the source they quote as being Video Game Lobbyists.. they go so far as to quote my report word for word without proper attribution (of course – is it too much to ask that professional demagogues properly cite their sources or is it too much to expect them to be ethical in their moral crusade?). Here is the statement verbatum from the PAC’s website:

Bush Administration Issues Cover-Up Report on the VA Tech Massacre

June 22, 2007 (LPAC)–The Bush Administration issued a report entitled “Report to the President on Issues Raised by the Virginia Tech Tragedy” on June 13. The video game lobby is praising the report for its cover-up of LPAC exposure of the Va Tech massacres. On June 21, on the lobby’s websites and magazines, Games Industry and Gammer Life, write: “Despite the efforts of video game critics Jack Thompson and Lyndon LaRouche, the V-Tech report is out with no mention of video games at all… According to GamePolitics, the video game issue was brought up at the V-Tech Review Panel hearings no less than three times by supporters of Lyndon LaRouche PAC.” The Administration report was prepared by Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and given to Bush. The VA Tech Review Panel, however, is still meeting and has not yet issued its final report.

This is interesting since the “report” was not finalized when I wrote that news item. Nice to know Gaming Today is now considered a lobby by LaRouche and his supporters. Perhaps we can try and inject some reality back into the overzealous political campaign to limit the rights of American consumers – ADULT American consumers.

Nice to see we sometimes get noticed. Too bad the link is tenuous and completely unrelated to the administration, the attorney general or any form of the government. It irks me to cover the news when we are the news I’m covering… albeit indirectly.

Despite the efforts of video game critics Jack Thompson and Lyndon LaRouche, the V-Tech report is out with no mention of video games at all. GamePolitics has the specifics on the 26 page report covering the April 16th Virginia Tech rampage.

Health & Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez collaborated on the report to the President. Although the issue of video games as a cause of Cho’s murderous shootings, was repeatedly raised it was pointedly left out of the final report.

A state-level commision is continuing research into the incedent on it’s own. Federal records indicate:

This report does not seek to investigate the specifics of the Virginia Tech tragedy itself. That work is currently being done by the Virginia Tech Review Panel appointed by Governor Kaine. Instead, this report summarizes the major recurring themes we heard in our visits across the country. It includes critical steps state and local leaders identified to address school violence and mental illness at the community level.

According to GamePolitics the video game issue was brought up at V-Tech Review Panel hearings no less than three times by supporters of Lyndon LaRouche PAC.

I see this decision to exclude video games from the report as a victory for the industry and gamers in general. The public is bombarded with rhetoric about the effects of video game violence and often gamers are outright maligned as a group. Claiming one for the team would feel good.

However, I feel the exclusion of the whole issue is probably due to the reasoning and good sense of the panel. There apparently was not enough evidence that video games had substantial influence in Cho’s irrational actions. Realize this report does not necessarily reflect the panel members personal views on video game violence.

Earlier this week I featured a well thought out if disturbing article Designing For Tragedy by Ian Bogost on the controversial V-Tech Rampage and Super Columbine Massacre RPG games. Another article written in the spirit of debate now answers the charges leveled by Bogost at GamePolitics. Here is a quick summation of the finer points.

GP admits to finding V-Tech Rampage in poor taste and that he did say the game will be used by some video game critics to support their anti-game agendas which, he points out, they already have in NY and elsewhere.

However, GP does not feel he supports “the industry over the medium”. He simply voiced an opinion that the industry should have been more proactive about V-Tech Rampage and Super Columbine Massacre RPG (SCMRPG) and on what they should have done in response. Also he admits that SCMRPG is better technically than V-Tech Rampage and was probably created without malice, he still doesn’t like it because it “creeps him out.”

He also says he would not banish games such as V-Tech Rampage and SCMRPG, but he does reserve the right to voice his hatred of them.

GP also believes that Bogost’s challenge to the industry to create a game on the V-Tech tragedy would be a really bad idea both from a sense of poor taste and business. he issues a responding challenge to Bogost.

If a commercial Virginia Tech game is such a great idea, put your money where your mouth is. Make the game yourself and see if the New York Times – with which you have a groundbreaking partnership deal – will run it.

This is a well thought out response to the article and is worth a read, including the comments made by Bogost himself. Feed your brain. Check it out.

Gamasutra’s Ian Bogost has a rather thoughtful if disturbing article on the Virginia Tech massacre and the game that it inspired. Bogost, a university professor,  explores the reasons behind making such a game. He discusses Ryan Lambourn’s V-Tech Rampage  – which has been described as insensitive and in poor taste. Many have compared it to the game spawned from the Columbine incident LeDonne’s Super Columbine Massacre RPG (SCMRPG). Bogost claims that the games are only superficially alike.

While SCMRPG portrayed Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold’s lives in researched detail, depicting the events of the Columbine massacre as the tragic outcome of two complex and misunderstood lives, V-Tech Rampage focuses on the acts of killing over the killer’s motives. While SCMRPG defamiliarizes murder by rendering it in RPG form, V-Tech Rampage encourages fast-fingered triggering.

He goes on to describe LeDonne as having “thoughtfully and convincingly connected his game with the personal effects Columbine on his life.” V-Tech Rampage provides a different insight into Lambourne character leaving one to wonder whether the disturbing quotes from the victims before they are snuffed are his idea off tasteless jokes or a cry for help from an unstable and possibly deeply troubled individual.

The root of the problem is that these video games are an attempt to interpret and deal with horrific events. Bogost accuses the big names in video games of avoiding hot button issues like these that need to addressed.

So I hereby issue a challenge to the videogame industry: to create a videogame about the Virginia Tech tragedy. One worthy of reflection. One that captures the event’s despair as well as much as its brutality. One that the public can respect even if it makes them uncomfortable.

He believes that a game could respectfully approach the factors that make up this tragedy. Hard questions could be explored, such as if the faculty could have recognized a student on the edge and what intervention could have been done within the structure of University politics. Whether Cho’s parents affected his choice by their actions or inaction. Could a security lockdown have actually helped the situation and how would you go about placing security for a large, open environment such as a university.

To answer these questions and more, Bogost issues a challenge to the game industry to “care about this tragic event enough to want to try to make sense of it, as best we are able, in our own medium.”

“The New York State Senate today passed legislation, sponsored by Senator Andrew Lanza (R-I, Staten Island), that would take steps to crack down on video game violence, and combat and reduce children’s exposure to violent and inappropriate materials within these games.

The bill (S.5888) would establish the Advisory Council on Interactive Media and Youth Violence to review the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) rating system and its effectiveness, and recommend additional steps that can be taken to curb children’s access and exposure to such “adult-only” material. The advisory council would consist of nine members and six ex-officio members”.

Lanza has joined the long list of politicians and media to publicly blame video games for the Virginia Tech massacre. I am really getting tired of how people in the public actually listen to these morons. The killer in Blacksburg didn’t even play video games. No games were found in his room… no systems.. not so much as a hand held game. Are the days of personal responsibility truly gone? I lost a great friend here at Virginia Tech and mourn the loss of all 32 victims. The only person or thing I blame is Cho. I’d do anything in the world to have my friend Ryan “Stack” Clark back here with us. I will not blame anything or anyone other than the killer, because blaming does not bring anyone back. Blaming will not prevent the next campus attack. No one knows when or where, but it will happen again in our future. Fortunately, it’s the outsiders who are blaming video games and whatever they can to further their political agendas. The majority of people here in the Virginia Tech community are not reacting this way. Maybe some of the world could learn from us.

Read the full article

Last week we reported a number of stories surrounding the controversial flash game V-Tech Rampage. The game and its content came under fire because it depicts an amateur video game surrounding the massacre at the university campus.

The game was programmed by an Australian man and is hosted by Newgrounds, a popular flash game repository. Until now Newgrounds has been quiet and stayed out of the coverage but yesterday afternoon Ross Snyder, a Newgrounds programmer, posted a note about why the company is and will continue to host the controversial game.

“We’re a place where you can find polished, professional-quality animations and games, as well as creations that are more coarse, more personal, more “anything goes” – and everybody’s welcome. While we do have some loose content guidelines, the site is still a haven for artists that might not have anyplace else to gain exposure for their work.”

Snyder goes on to say that Newgrounds is a home for content that is often considered “edgy” and that though he personally finds the game in bad taste that the communicty members will judge the merits and they should have the opportunity to do so.

Snyder’s full statement is copied after the jump, but to read the discussion that has flourished since his post click here.

Read the full article