Blogging the experience of gameplayhttps://www.gamelog.cl/gamers/GamerPage.php?idgamer=883https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3461I had read that there was a "hell" level in this game, and my initial thought in reading that was, oh great, at least the game has some consequences. I was wrong. When you're in hell, you fetch cake for a googly-eyed satan who is congratulatory. The protagonists are happy to be there and enjoy it; it's ridiculous. It was difficult to play this game, I felt sick after a while because I know so much about the real events that unfolded and this game was not only based on them, it wasn't even saying they were wrong. I don't think mass killing is ever constructive in a video game media, but even less so when the main characters are wrongly identified as protagonists. I think the game is unethical in the moral statement that it is making (or lacking) and that it is misleading the player.Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:36:46 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3461&iddiary=6471https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3461My second time playing Super Columbine Massacre RPG my experience was a little different, but my overall feelings about the game did not change. True, many video games contain tremendous amounts of violence, even more than this game. However, few games are based in reality and this one is. If a game is based in reality, it needs to serve the purpose of teaching a lesson or moral value. This game only glorifies detracts from the acts committed by these men. For example, the two laugh while killing, and count each murder as a victory for the trench coat mafia. But the game itself never makes a statement that what the two did was wrong. So it seems this game serves no purpose in terms of morals, just reenacting a violent crime and therefore is inappropriate.Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:15:21 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3461&iddiary=6469https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3461What struck me the first time I played this game was the contrast of the images of reality interspersed with the imaginary world of the game. The game begins with a famous photo of Harris and Klebold, guns in hand and mid-rampage captured by a security camera during the shootings, and then we see blurry pixels of color with backwards hats. While the characters continue through the game, we see the two talk to each other and when they talk we see the faces of the two real killers and they speak in language that sounds plausibly like what they may have said to each other, and not very different from the way we speak. It seems to me like this is playing it a little unfairly for the game makers, because obviously in having the killers as the main characters, they are portrayed as the protagonists. It's as though by making the two men less human and showing them as animated characters while they are killing people, the crimes are minimized. No blood, no screams, the victims just disappear. Then the game uses real life photos, quotes and excerpts from sources than inspired the boys, music they listened to, but only when it inspires pathos or empathy in the player. This seems to show the two men in not a harsh enough light perhaps, or that in fact they were not committing violent and horrible acts.Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:17:19 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3461&iddiary=6468https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3389After my third (and probably final) time playing Grand Theft Auto San Andreas, I am more turned off from playing the game than in my initial experience. This was because this time playing, I explored the issues with women in the games. Perhaps just because I am a woman, I was more than a little offended by the treatment of women in the game. The only appearance I saw of women in the game besides short appearances of girlfriends and voices screaming, were prostitutes. This suggests to me that not only are women portrayed in a negative light, but also that their only purpose is for sex. During the game, the character has the ability to have sex with prostitutes, and then kill them to get out of paying them. This turned me off of the game because although maybe this makes a statement about how we view women in our society today, I don’t think it makes its point to any effective end. Most players just enjoy having sex with and killing the hookers (women) and I had a really hard time playing the game after this.Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:31:18 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3389&iddiary=6309https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3389The next time I played GTA 3, I felt that certain aspects of the game, specifically the violence, elicited a reaction of anger from me. I am not sure whether of not this was the intention of the makers of the game. Playing this game was upsetting to me because the game connected you to one particular character’s struggle, and they picked stereotypical characters so you already know how you feel about them at the beginning and that is connected to a strong emotional reaction. My main objection was the unnecessary violence. Obviously, as I said in my previous entry, perhaps this violence serves a point and can’t be too realistic But it’s a little hard to watch. Not just the mandatory violence that is built into the game, but optional violence your character can partake in for no reason; not because he is being attacked or to accomplish a mission, but because it’s entertainment to kill hookers, old people, passerby walking down the street. I have a hard time with that. Not to mention a drive-by every 15 seconds. I felt that it was very clever and a little unfair to play with gamers feelings and opinions in such a way. I don’t understand the possible pleasure one could get from watching even an animated drive by and hearing screams of women and children. Perhaps this is a suggestion of what would happen in an “everyone does what they want” kind of society, but I think if we lived like that, we’d be a more peaceful civilization (than the world of GTA), and I think situations like the one in GTA3 happen when a few people decide to do whatever they want and everyone else abides by society’s rules.Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:42:54 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3389&iddiary=6303https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3389When I played GTA 3 the first time, I wasn’t too shocked by anything in the game. I’ve played GTA 4 and heard so much of the hype and negative publicity that the games have been getting, that in that way it was pretty much what I was expecting. I was prepared to take the game at face value, however, after I played a while, I feel it became a little more to me. I don’t have any doubts that the game is excessively violent and I won’t argue that it contains sexual content, but I do think that there is a misconception about why the game is made the way it is. Game companies make what sells, and violence sells. As a nation, nothing shocks us anymore. We are so numb to the concept of real suffering that watching innocent bystanders being hit by cars is funny to us. I honestly believe that if game makers thought fluffy bunnies and lollipops would sell, we’d have games about that. I don’t think it’s wrong for theses companies to turn a profit off our addiction (with a disclaimer that the game is rated M…seven year old Jimmy shouldn’t be playing it because he doesn’t yet understand irony.) However, I do think the people making the GTA games have more of an understanding of American culture than we give them credit for. They may in fact be doing us more service than harm. The world of GTA is so morally corrupt; the violence is so excessive, that it serves to make a statement about us as a country. The game makers are making fun of the very people who are purchasing this game. The overt sexuality, the racial stereotyping…..this “controversy” is a mirror for the American people. (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:24:16.)Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:23:20 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=3389&iddiary=6302