Quote:Original post by bdoskocil
I suppose I'm not the right person to attempt it, since I seem to be having a difficult time even convincing people of the value of attempting it, so I will now withdraw and leave the discussion to others.

Because the value you see in attempting it is showing that games are truly "Art" with a capital "A".

You said yourself that these games should not have a political agenda; promoting games as Art is political. Do not exploit the situation for your political agenda.

There are two situations in which I think such a work is appropriate:

1) You were deeply touched by the tragedy and felt the need to express your feelings in a work of art and, being a game designer, you naturally made a game.

2) Someone who was deeply touched by the tragedy approached you and comissioned a game in memory of the tragedy.


You want to know how to do it right? You said that you've lost someone close to you; make a game about losing that person.

The interesting point that this discussion brings to mind for me is the unusual position games are in, where such creations as the poor-taste Virginia Tech thing are viewed as an appropriate comparison to serious or well thought out artistic games. It seems to me that it would be similar to condemning the film industry based on a "Man gets hit in the groin by a football" clip on Youtube. The games industry really needs new terminology or other measures to seperate itself in peoples' minds from these 5-seconds-of-effort pieces of self gratification.


That said, at the same time I dont necessarily see an inherent problem with basing a game on events of that nature. While many people respond to the event with raw emotion and tend to show a dislke for anything related to the event, be it well intentioned and thoughtful or crass and thoughtless, I think the fact that the subject matter is confrontational is a sign that a game could be created which has a useful and well intentioned message. I think it could actually be more effective because of the high profile and confrontational nature of the content - confrontation causes such strong reactions because it challenges people to think about things, and that isnt always a bad thing.

And I think that the OP could be right about its relevance to artistry and integrity in the games industry. Sure, it is a very difficult subject to approach, and there are an awful lot of ways to do it wrong; but I think that is part of what is involved in art - the subject is deep and complex, and does hold some worthwhile messages, such as (off the top of my head) commentary on compassion and the dangers of teen depression, to balance out the more purely violent or hurtful aspects - the ability to apply insight and form a positive message from something like this is what I would consider a key aspect of many forms of art.

As others have pointed out, though, it would need to come from a true artistic vision of the message to convey, rather than the viewpoint of "this is an opportunity to do something artsy".

Quote:Original post by caffiene
The interesting point that this discussion brings to mind for me is the unusual position games are in, where such creations as the poor-taste Virginia Tech thing are viewed as an appropriate comparison to serious or well thought out artistic games. It seems to me that it would be similar to condemning the film industry based on a "Man gets hit in the groin by a football" clip on Youtube.

No, it's either:

1) If you're referring only to the poor-taste VT game, it's like condemning a film on YouTube gleefully reenacting the shootings for being in poor taste.

2) If you're regerring to the thread as a whole, it's like condemning the film industry for making a memorial video to prove that films can appropriately treat serious subjects.

Both of which I think are condemnable.

Quote:Original post by bdoskocil
I do not have any direct personal attachment to the VTech shootings, although, like most people, I have lost somebody close to me. I don't think, however, that that should determine my sincerity.

In actuality, I never intended to make this game personally, but rather to discuss how somebody might make such a game, and what it might look like. The consensus seems to be it's not possible (at least by me).

I suppose I'm not the right person to attempt it, since I seem to be having a difficult time even convincing people of the value of attempting it, so I will now withdraw and leave the discussion to others.

Well, I believe you that it would be possible to make a thoughtful and artful game about the VTech shootings. And I applaud your interest in changing the way people think about games.

But I think the problem we all have with a VTech game is the timing. It reeks of ambulance chasing (like LessBread said). If you slap the name "Virginia Tech" on a game right now, it will receive 10x to 100x the attention than it otherwise would, which is exploitative.

So if you want to continue in your efforts to prove that games can be artful and relevant to society (and I hope you do), there are some other avenues you can take:

1) You could make it a bit more generic. Make a game about loss, make it something that the VTech survivors can identify with and learn from, but don't put the Virginia Tech name on it.

2) You could base the game on a different tragedy (there are many to choose from). One that isn't so fresh in the victim's minds.

3) You could wait 1-2 years until the Virginia Tech hysteria has settled, and then make the game. That way, your audience would have a much easier time believing that you made the game for the right reasons.