Operation: Pedopriest
Posted by Derek Yu Fri, 12 Oct 2007 05:00:00 GMT
From the title of the game, you might expect that you’re playing to stop the pedophile priests, but actually, you’re playing to cover up the sexual abuse of the horny paters. This, as you can imagine, changes things quite a bit.
Quote Ian Bogost:
Operation: Pedopriest is definitely disturbing to play, and the cartoony graphics do little to mitigate the how awful it all feels. Which isn’t a condemnation of the game itself, mind you – I’m quite certain this is the exact reaction developer Molleindustria was going for. It does make it quite a mixed bag of gaming peanuts, though – do I even WANT to win at this?
The game mechanics are quite simple, and involve clicking “eunuchs” around to distract adults and police officers while the clergy is molesting children. When things get really bad, you can airlift a priest out of there to go hide out in the Vatican. When a certain number of priests are arrested before the given time limit runs out, it’s game over.
You know, I just figured there wasn’t enough controversy on TIGSource…
(Source: Play This Thing!)
Sigh, somebody delete Joaquin’s browser-crashing link, please. This is getting extremely old.
Yeah, man, stop that. It’s lame.
Anyways, the game is pretty sick. I definitely have more problems with this game than with the Columbine RPG, bút the idea behind it is the same. Get some more attention for these problems which is good. Still… I don’t feel like winning in this game.
Another shock game? sigh
I don’t think the cartoony graphics go toward mitigating how awful it feels. I think they make it feel more awful.
Well I can at least check “Play Religious Pedophile game” off my list now if nothing else. Not that I was hoping to check that one off or anything.
Why would you have a problem with this? Does it scare you that this sort of thing goes on in real life? The actuality of the situation is that some people play this game in real life every day!
Well, really, you’re not abusing children in this game. You’re just browbeating witnesses so they’ll stay silent, “debriefing” the young victims, and shipping the rapist priests off to escape prosecution. All, of course, in the name of autonomy from secular governments.
Which basically is what happens in real life as well. =)
I’m from Poland, a country where the catholic church has a very strong influence on society, so I should know. =)
I think it’s totally acceptable to use games as a medium to elaborate controversial issues, but in this case the gameplay fails in its funtamental nature to motivate the player to beat the game, since my only ambition would be to get all the priests busted as fast as possible.
Never trust an institution that announces condoms to be penetrable to AIDS…
i thought it was funny and tried to save my pedo priests the best i could.
what does that say about me? D:
I tried to win, too. After all, those aren’t real pedopriests or real children on the screen, and it’s more challenging to win than to lose.
On the other hand, I wasn’t exactly upset about losing. Or disappointed.
molleindustria was behind that mcdonalds sim, right?
I feel sorry about this game. I believe the intentions to expose this behavior in certain religious organizations is noble but the means are completly wrong. The game lacks class, tact and maturity.
The fact that we see and hear the child being abused is tasteless and the player’s motivation to cover up the priest is inexistent. When this occurs in real life, there is a context why would one cover up his superior. In this game, it simply focuses on you being evil, covering up others, enforcing the stereotype of the “old pedophile priest” and that the church is in fact an evil organisation that only wishes misery upon the world.
It’s too bad that the game gives a penalty to the player when taking a moral choice. Winning implies covering up all the nastyness and loosing is following a path of justice. There are no good rewards in this game when choosing the righteous path which is, I believe, very bad for a game that wants to expose this kind of issue.
The graphics are very cute which, as mentionned earlier, makes this even more disgusting. They make everything feel light and funny when it’s in fact very serious. Some subjects can be cartoonised to have a stronger impact but raping children is definitively not one.
And I’m not even gonna get started about how the game’s learning curve and controls are weak as well as it’s intuitivism.
I just wish that just once, somebody will make a good, mature and intelligent game about a controversial subject. Just once.
You should give Peacemaker a try. It does exactly that.
That would have been much more funny if they made a flash game where us troops try to rape iraqi children or young girls.. hmm wait no it would have been the same sh.it…
Why the hell should i play this game? for God’s sake..
Oh yeah, forgot about that game! Shame on me!
I wish there would be MORE good, mature and intelligent games about a controversial issue ;)
You’re falling into the same trap that the knee-jerk anti-videogame crowd do, showing bias against the medium. If The Onion released a parody video about priests molesting children (again) you wouldn’t be nearly as offended as you are by this game. Why is that?
And what would a serious game on this subject entail? By “good and mature” you mean “I wish they’d sweep the graphic elements under the rug and let me deal with the light and frilly fringes of the subject so I can fake enlightenment without my delicate sensibilities being offended”. Yeah, in that case Peacemaker is right up your alley.
How about a game where you manage the vatican bank accounts and set payout amounts of “hush money” for the continuing flood of molesters? Is that less offensive?
I have to agree with Guert on this one. Games that portray such heinous acts as these (and they truly are) as a game, in which doing the bad thing rewards you, especially with the comic-y art style and light-hearted air, is just plain wrong. The things this “game” represents are not a game, people, these are real men abusing real boys. Why would you want to try on the role of a man abusing a boy?
The arguments about “maybe they are just trying to make people aware of it” just don’t fly, either. It’s in the news enough that you’d have to live under a rock not to know about it. Besides which the graphics are lighthearted, the tone is goofy, the premise is to do the wrong thing and to be rewarded WITH HUMOR for doing it. If it smells like crap, looks like crap, and tastes like crap, it’s most likely crap. You can try to say it’s a T-Bone steak, and smile as you eat it, but it’s still disgusting and ultimately harmful for you. Poop hurts you if you eat it people.
I think that there is a large motivation to be accepting of this sort of thing though, as right now, with all of the talk about games as art, anybody who tries to “push the envelope” and then gets called on for it is simply a misunderstood, repressed artist. Bullshit. They are either getting their own sick fantasies out or else trying to get some name recognition through shock factor. It’s like the dark side of the force, quicker, easier, more seductive, but ultimately a weak and hollow excuse for the real deal.
There is a difference between presenting evil for what it is with the intention of understanding it and overcoming it, and simply exploiting it for fun and profit. The former can produce true, real art, the latter is simply a glorified version of a very base capitalism at best, or an excuse for living out one’s darkest fantasies virtually at worst.
If The Onion released a parody video about priests molesting children (again) you wouldn’t be nearly as offended as you are by this game. Why is that?
Simple.. people don’t take The Onion as serious as these games for some reason. Interactive parodies aren’t funny-bias is all over the place…
The Onion makes fun of (sometimes) controversial things just for the entertainment we get out of it. Sure, some topics tend to go a bit deeper (only when you think about what’s said and read between the lines though), but all those movies and articles they have are way not serious enough to have a real message other than being a simple reminder…
But… I’m not sure how this game is any different from that.
Funny how everyone thinks BioShock is the second coming of Christ because you get to kill little girls but everyone here hates this game because you get to rape little boys…
Encouraging evil in video games is nothing new, in fact it is a major selling point in a lot of popular games… (Black and White, Fable, KotOR, OverLord)
i REALLY don’t see what the big controversy about this game is. We play humorous war games where we kill cartoony people and are rewarded for it. Whatever your opinion on the validity of those games is, I don’t see a very big difference between killing people and molesting children.
By “good and mature” you mean “I wish they’d sweep the graphic elements under the rug and let me deal with the light and frilly fringes of the subject so I can fake enlightenment without my delicate sensibilities being offended”.
Huh. Somehow I found this game to be extremely light and frilly.
Believe me, I don’t fall in with the anti-video game crowd, or at least, I like to think I don’t. I make them as a hobby, for crying out loud :P. But I do oppose people who try to use my medium of choice like this. And if the Onion were to do something similar, I’d say the same thing, as the medium is largely irrelevant of the content. It’s one thing to make a game, or movie, or article in which evil is portrayed AS EVIL, and is to be stopped, or in some way despised, but to try to make it into a light-hearted joke where you are supposed to laugh at or along with men raping young boys? It hardly seems like something to be laughing at, as it is not funny in the least.
But it IS an ongoing joke - even Jay Leno does the gay priest bits from time to time. If you don’t get the joke by now then you don’t have a sense of humor.
Regardless, I’d like to hear what someone thinks would be an appropriate and mature handling of the subject in game form. Or is the medium too unsophisticated to handled weighty topics? (Honest question - not sarcastic)
I approve
I think the comparison between this game and Peacemaker highlights an important disctinction - Pedopriest is a game you play once or twice, that shocks you, and is free to play. Peacemaker is a game you play repeatedly in order to refine deep strategies and you must purchase it in order to come to that level of experience. They’re both great, and they both are designed and positioned to serve these two different strategies. They both effectively use processes to demonstrate social issues. Their differences are also useful, it’d be hard to do as complex an issue as Isreali-Palestinian releations in a web-game, and few would buy a downloadable game about Catholic cover-ups of child molestation.
But no, seriously. What is the big deal, again?
Well, that’s satire for you. Satire doesn’t sit well with everybody. It’s often not the kind of thing designed to evoke feel-good belly laughs. Editorial cartoons are frequently the same way.
oh, my precious sensibilities. i may be drunk but when was the last time that satire had to be delicate and mature? give me a break.
Haha, this is really funny. The best part is people bitching about it just like that columbine.. porcupine.. whatever, game. Get over it already. Games aren’t meant to be taken seriously.
I’d like to add a little thing…
When I loaded up this page and saw the game, I laughed. I found the idea funny to play the bad guys. It looked like it had humor, cool graphics and some interesting content and on top of that a controversial subjects in which I am interested in. I simply love it when cages are shaken! :)
So, I followed the link and loaded up the game. I quickly checked the controls and plunged into the game. At this point I will skip all the gameplay comments and zoom straight to the part where I got surprised… in a bad way.
So, the priest starts caressing a little kid. Ok, weird but acceptable. Then he caresses it more. Ok, weirder but slightly less acceptable. Then… The game shows graphic representation of the abuse on the child along with a big scream coming out of the victim. That’s when I felt angry.
First of all, showing this kind of act that explicitly is close to illegal.
Second, we clearly see a child being raped. Want it or not, rape is a very hard subject no matter your cultural background. A victim of rape is scared for the rest of his life. it’s a pain no one should ever feel.
Third, the witnesses do absolutely nothing to stop this. They simply walk to a phone, leaving the priest alone with the kid again. It felt unnatural and immoral.
Fourth, the characters I control have no obvious reason to save the priest. Actualy, I felt it would’ve been more natural to turn them in and raise my rank and then decide to do or not the vile act myself rather than save them. Evil eats evil. The only reason why I would defend a priest like that is that if someone was menacing me in some way, and even then I would personaly choose death (but that’s a moral choice)
In all cases, I feel the game would have been alot better by being less explicit. Also, it would have shown taste and respect to the victims of these acts in the real world.
True, molesting kids and killing people are basicaly the same but in games where you shoot people down, you have a reason: they’ll shoot you if you don’t. Here the player has no motivation or context and that’s why I don’t like it. The kids are innocent and are pure victims and you do nothing to help them.
I feel like the creators should have researched the psychological implication of the player in their game, especialy with a topic like that. As game dveeloppers, we are repsonsible for the messages we deliver in our games: people listen and learn, want it or not. This game tells us that protecting those who are decadent will honor you make you a better person. I don’t feel this moral is a good thing to teach.
Later! (sorry for the long comment ;) )
What’s this morality nonsense all of a sudden about? Games make you commit immoral things all of the time. Homocid, genocide you name it. And what reason/justification do those games provide for your actions? (personally I do think there is no valid justification for either)
Neither do I mean to attack anyone, nor do I approve of this game here (or the act that is performed therein), but talking about morality in videogames because of this flash games seems just silly to me. Hundreds of games are beeing released every year that make the player commit far worse deeds directly (in this game you’re not doing much yourself, you’re “just covering up”) and starting with morallity because of this game seems like going to the doctor because of a papercut when you lived with a knife in your back for the last decade.
Games aren’t meant to be taken seriously.
My point exactly… :) It’s the same as people who claim that current day games are realistic or even too realistic. That’s so untrue, especially because games will never be anything other than virtual realities that won’t come close to reality in the sense of being actual reality.
That wasn’t MY point actually. Games can and should be taken seriously. But if you’re going to make an example out of the dynamics of this particular game, you’re opening up a gigantic can of worms.
There is this really super controversial game called Black and White where you wipe out populations of different creed. Women, children and all, all in a funny cartoon fashion.
Youknowhatimsayin’?
You people are so fucking boring.
For some reason, my last comment got deleted or didn’t got saved, I dunno…
Anyway, all of theses comments saddens me… Games are not serious… There’s nothing wrong here… Very explicit child raping isn’t so bad if it’s with cartoons in videogames…
I dunno what else to say… Except that, if the medium of videogame wants to be recognized, it’ll need to do more than clearly show child getting raped by priests and have the player approve it all. But that’s my opinion… You have the right to yours too ;)
Why should games be judged differently from other mediums? I mean, If i saw a funny cartoon about child rapists, i would probably laugh if it was truly funny. Same as a game can be fun or not regardless of whether you’re stepping on goombas or raping children. The dynamics of the medium have nothing to do with the content, but it’s up to you whether you want to take the content into the context.
There is a very real difference between raping a virtual child for laughs and fragging your friends for fun. Your friends have guns too. They can defend themselves. Most games are not about preying on the helpless and finding it amusing but about outwitting, out-thinking, and out-shooting your opponents, who are attempting to defeat you as well. An opponent and a victim are completely different things.
The videogame equivalent of raping kids isn’t fragging your friends (or aliens, or goombas, or whatever), it’s walking into a virtual classroom with a shotgun and shooting the 10-year olds inside while they are helpless and scared. Whether they are rendered cartoony or graphic, it’s still sick.
I mean seriously guys, you are honestly saying there is nothing wrong with raping (or coordinating the raping) of children for fun and amusement so long as they are not real children but merely representations of children. Do you seriously think it doesn’t reflect, if not the game, at least a part of yourself, even if just by your indifference?
Which makes me wonder, if raping children as a game, as satire, is so far removed from reality that it is harmless fun so long as the player understands that they are not real children they are molesting, then how can you claim that such a game will have any kind of social impact whatsoever? If it bounces off of you without harmful effect, why would you expect it to have an effect on anybody else? It sounds to me like gaming has no chance of being used as a social commentary device at all, since it’s all just harmless (and hence ineffectual) fun anyways.
Games can and should be taken seriously.
Why? When was the last time any game raised ANY issue “seriously”? Even if any genius DID manage to do that with a GAME inside a GAME.. it’s still a GAME. If you want to bring attention to a cause or yourself (which most of these developers want, tbh) write a biography or make a documentary. When people play games they don’t play them learn anything. They play it to have fun and if the game raises dumb issues, they will be ignored.
There is this really super controversial game called Black and White where you wipe out populations of different creed. Women, children and all, all in a funny cartoon fashion.
That’s cause you are a GOD and considering the amount of people who believe in a god in the real life.. I think they’ll understand (or ‘get it’). Hell, hurricane Katrina is also controversial for most people in that case, probably.
toastie’s got it.
“I mean seriously guys, you are honestly saying there is nothing wrong with raping (or coordinating the raping) of children for fun and amusement so long as they are not real children but merely representations of children. Do you seriously think it doesn’t reflect, if not the game, at least a part of yourself, even if just by your indifference?”
LOOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOOL
I think the fact that people clicked on the link, even after reading Derek’s accurate description of the game and came back offended says just as much..
Nobody forced you to play it. I didn’t and and I’m not even offended by this game.
*That wasn’t MY point actually. Games can and should be taken seriously. But if you’re going to make an example out of the dynamics of this particular game, you’re opening up a gigantic can of worms.
There is this really super controversial game called Black and White where you wipe out populations of different creed. Women, children and all, all in a funny cartoon fashion.*
Mmm, okey whatever hahaha ;). But I do think your last line proves the point of why games shouldn’t be taken too seriously. I mean, come on, why do people have enough imagination not to take the moral part within B&W too seriously, but end up being totally offended by games such as Pedopriest? Basically it does the same on a different level, perhaps with the minor exception that you can’t rape your followers in B&W, but you cán burn them, drown them and throw them on rocks instead, heck you can even feed them to your pet creature. So… perhaps it’s not thát different, or?
Note: I think real pedophiles should at least be locked away forever or even get the electric chair if they’ve ever raped a kid. I’ve definitely got no mercy for them whatsoever.
“I mean seriously guys, you are honestly saying there is nothing wrong with raping (or coordinating the raping) of children for fun and amusement so long as they are not real children but merely representations of children. Do you seriously think it doesn’t reflect, if not the game, at least a part of yourself, even if just by your indifference?”
Well, I doubt that I would truly enjoy these kind of game experiences, but no I don’t quite see how it’s wrong, especially because it isn’t happening in reality, but in virtual reality… a fake world. Why must moral rules apply to a virtual fake-ness??
Isn’t virtual reality the perfect place to escape reality and do things that you otherwise would never do or wouldn’t be able to do?
They should have done a game where US troops rape iraqi children or young girls.. hmm no wait that would have been the same sh.it as this 1.
Why the hell should i play this? For God’s sake..
An opponent and a victim are completely different things.
True, but not quite if the choice of them being a victim is up to the gamer, quite some games give that choice as there are often NPCs which you cán kill, but aren’t necessarily hostile towards you at first. Enough RPGs have this.
Can’t say the game offended me in the slightest, but then only last week I saw a paedophile disguised as a school.
The game *is* a bit on the pants side though.
Not really any fun to play, didn’t raise much of a smile, nor did it especially make me think about anything other than what I was going to do in 30 seconds time instead of get bored clicking little people.
As satire, if indeed it was meant as satire, it wasn’t especially satirical either. As for raising awareness for a problem? Meh, must try harder.
Give me Chris Morris over this anyday.
Some people take comedy and games far too seriously. Humor is good, so is laughing. I mean - I hope nobody will say that this kind of game could push some people in the direction of child-rape. Games are not real-life and any sane person can see this and any insane person can’t be helped anyway…
What the fuck!? for God’s sake, why the hell do people keep making shit games like this!?!? bah, this is just tasteless bullshit, much like that columbine game and the other crappy shooting one, only 10 times worse.
Graphics look decent though.
@ Lim-Dul Well yeh, of course games are not real, but they can depict reality, even in the most abstract of approaches.
Everyone who complains about being offended by playing this game……..you read the write up Derek did, then you went and downloaded it and played it. Then you were in a huff about playing a game that had you defending pedophile priests…..You could always do what I did and not download it and not play it. If you went and played it and are now all offended……um, you knew what the game was about, Derek made it clear.
..you read the write up Derek did, then you went and downloaded it and played it. Then you were in a huff about playing a game that had you defending pedophile priests…..
Actually, I didn’t play it. As you say, Derek had a pretty good summary AND a picture, there really wasn’t any need to.
But, even if I had, so what? Let’s pretend Derek didn’t supply the picture. Then what? I have the option of not playing the game and then I could attempt to point out how sick it is and horrible and blah blah blah, but I wouldn’t be able to back it up. The first thing that anybody with any brains would come back with is: “did you actually play the game? No? Then shut up.”. And they would be right.
The other option is to say nothing and just pass it by. If people are saying “it’s okay, it’s okay” and you don’t think it is, but you don’t want to potentially make yourself squeamish by exposing yourself to it, aren’t you really just wimping out? If somebody tells you that people are dying in Darfur, and other people tell you they aren’t, but you decide not to look at some pro-offered images of the genocide and form an educated opinion and THINK FOR YOURSELF because those pictures might disturb you, are you really taking the mature path and being a responsible adult?
Neither of the above options are acceptable. The only thing to do is to play the game so you actually know what you are talking about and can argue with authority on the subject, if that is even necessary. It’s possible that the people saying “it’s okay” are right. You won’t know for sure until you expose yourself to it.
In this case, the picture easily backs up Derek’s writeup. Without it, though, I would have played the game. Without that information, without some verification (including playing the game) of what Derek or anybody else says, I would just be a parrot without any reason to open my mouth at all. And nobody here would (rightly) have any reason to pay any attention to me at all.
Your argument breaks down to this: don’t educate yourself about something that might be potentially wrong, or horrible, with the intention of trying to figure out where the truth about the matter lies, because it might upset you. And if it upsets you, then don’t complain because you looked. Okay, so let’s just stick our heads in the sand and not take a look at reality then. Forming opinions on hearsay is a perfectly acceptable way to think and live your life. “Sweeping the graphic elements under the rug and letting me deal with the light and frilly fringes of the subject so I can fake enlightenment without my delicate sensibilities being offended” . It’s better than making yourself feel icky inside. Right?
I for one have no intention of sweeping the details under the rug. Nor do I have any intention of glossing over what those details are. These are virtual children. They are being virtually raped. And people are claiming that this is harmless fun. I say it is sick. And I am willing to expose myself to whatever is necessary to be able to make that claim intelligently. I don’t make it lightly, I make it because I think this is wrong, and it is worth it to oppose that which is wrong.
the people dying in Darfur are not virtual people
And the people playing this game are not virtual people. The humor they are getting out of this is not vitual humor, the indifference they show towards explicit (just because it’s stylized to be cartoony doesn’t make it non-explicit) representations of such horrific acts is not virtual indifference.
It’s not really explicit though, more a bit silly.
As an opening statement, I don’t think it’d be wrong to say that nobody around here supports pedophilia in any way. Right? Okay, that’s out of the way.
Now, this is a game with a message. Let’s compare the intentions of this game to the McDonald’s sim. Both involve you doing something criminal to win the game. Neither game is promoting the acts they satirize.
The only difference between these two games is the subject matter. And if the purpose of the game is to spread a message, then this game, I’d say, does a better job. Is anything more sobering than actually witnessing (albeit stylised) children being abused? I’d think people actually get the message more acutely in this game because of the representation.
If the developer’s aim is to make people realise just how wrong this covering up is, then I say that they’re doing a good job of it.
David, you aren’t even making sense. Take a look at your last post and please try to boil down whatever the fuck you’re trying to say into some kind of structured argument.
You didn’t play the game but you’d be remiss in not playing the game that you didn’t play but the picture was enough so you didn’t have to play the game and PEOPLE ARE DYING IN DARFUR THINK FOR YOURSELVES!!!11oneone.
I once saw a homeless man scream a more coherent monologue at a fire hydrant. I think the above poster’s comment was more along the lines that he wished you hadn’t played the game so that we didn’t have to listen to you.
In other news, Guert, you’re a pretty reasonable guy, so here’s the scoop: There is a problem with Catholic priests in a lot of areas, where they like to molest children because they are awful, awful failures of human beings. You say that you felt sickened by the fact that you had to assist pedophiles when, in reality you’d report them.
This is good.
Thing is, when complaints come up about a priest, instead of having him stripped of his priesthood or criminally charged, the Vatican simply rushes him off to another diocese where he is instated as priest of a different parish (my terminology might be off, but you get the drift). Of course, they don’t tell anyone in the new parish about any controversy surrounding him and, surprise surprise, it all starts happening again when he starts molesting different children.
Lather, rinse, repeat, as it were.
The idea of the game is to expose how sick and disturbing it is that an institution like the Catholic church thinks saving face is more important than punishing a crime like rape. So they dress it up in bright colours and funny graphics as satire, to say, “Hey, here’s how the Catholic church feels about raping little boys.”
Whether or not you agree with them, my point is that it’s not just sensationalism for sensationalism’s sake. It’s satire meant not to make light of the crimes, but to expose the hypocrisy of the institution that allows criminals to continue to prey on the innocent because to prosecute them would be ‘bad press.’
Hopefully that makes a bit more sense.
Umm, it is satire, I think. Just a really crappy job of it. And a pretty crappy game.
The arguement that because games aren’t serious so this is okay is stupid. Of course raping kids isn’t okay. The mere inclusion of it makes this a very serious game. Or a humourous game with an underlying serious theme. (this is what it attempts, but, yeah, didn’t laugh)
The light-hearted cartoonish approach certainly doesn’t make it okay or right either. What it does is serve to create the mock-approval of the subject that is essensial to satire. In a similar sense, if you weren’t rewarded for helping the raping of the kids, it wouldn’t WORK. Yes, it’s going to upset people.
These sorts of games (or films, books, comics etc.) will make some people sick in their stomachs. If they don’t, they’re kind of failing.
This, um, aside. I really don’t appreciate this kind of work. But I’m also the kind of person that doesn’t like horror etc. It just makes me feel ill.
Look, I’m sorry, but I’m just not very upset about the possibility, or even the certainty, that some people might be insufficiently horrified – or entertained – by a simulation. Certainly I am no where, any where near as upset by that as by instances of real murder of real people, real rape of real people, or real genocide of real people. That is my absolute position, and I am not letting it go.
Well said Pita.
Controversy GET!
I didn’t like the Mcdonalds simulator, but I thought this game was much better at making it’s point.
The difference is that the rhetoric pushed by McVideogame seemed mostly false or inflated, “you are succeeding in business, you MUST surely be commiting horrible crimes against humanity then.”
Of course there is little debate over whethert priests raping kids and allowing this to happen or covering it up is wrong. In this regard the game promotes little more than utter contempt or disdain for the people or organisations that allow this stuff to happen.
This game seems to exist primarily to promote awareness of the BBC documentary. It is not a game you are meant to play, except once perhaps. But the entire thing seems engineered for other purposes. So in one way, it has succeeded. I didn’t know about the documentary, I play games, and heard about it through this site. As a “game” it fails because I didn’t want to play it. But, I don’t think the developers care about that.
@ Lim-Dul Well yeh, of course games are not real, but they can depict reality, even in the most abstract of approaches.
Something that just depicts reality is not reality in the real sense, especially the more abstract things become. Games are just visualized ideas and provoked experiences, but the games themselves are never going to be anything you could consider to be truly real.
The best comparison would be with having the thought of wanting to hurt someone because you are angry and instead of coming to this thought yourself, it was handed over to you in the form of interactivity. The difference between having that thought and actually going to hurt someone in real-life, is exactly what makes it(games) unreal.
We don’t get arrested for fragging an opponent in games for a good reason. “D
Here’s what I think, instead of being angry at this pathetic game, you should be angry with a retarded religion whose prominent members, who are designed to be respected and responsible, are starved of one of the basic natural drives, and are able to use their influence to get what they need in a completely inappropriate and damaging way.
All this righteous indignation about this video game is far more hilarious than the game itself which is clearly not funny as everyone has already pointed out. Get a hold of yourselves.
I’m just gonna skip the moral implications and just say “all seeing eye :)”
Excuse me?
Note to Derek - make a fake description of a controversial game, fake screenshot, fake link. Have fun at those who “didn’t click”.
Oddbob is obviously off his mash on ecstacy pipes.
@Haowan: Religion doesn’t have nothing to do here. I am angry against any pedo, they be priest, soldier or whatever work.. and i am against bigots as you that drinks everything the tv tells you.
I watched the bbc documentary months ago. I never eat at mcdonald (if i wanna eat sh.it i made plenty in my house-toilet) so i have a brain and don ‘t need tv or stu.pid flashgames to be a real citizen of this si.ck world.
@ David
Quote: “don’t educate yourself about something that might be potentially wrong, or horrible, with the intention of trying to figure out where the truth about the matter lies, because it might upset you”.
I never said anything of the sort. I know very well that pedophilia is concealed by the church and I think its terrible. Its one more thing I hate about the hypocricy of organised religion. I don’t feel it neccesary to play a game to educate me as to this injustice. Commenting that a game like this is tasteless seems redundant. My comment was simply, if a game is going to offend you, avoid it. You basically misconstrued it to read what you wanted me to be saying “Hide under a rock and remain ignorant of all nasty things”, just so you could post your epic response.
@Mandrake42
If I misunderstood you, then I’m sorry. It very much sounded like that was what you were saying from what you wrote, but since it wasn’t, my apologies. I’ve heard that particular argument a lot, it’s one of my pet peeves :).
Apology accepted. I agree with you in a way, in that this kind of crime should be fought tooth and nail. I don’t mean these silly games, its the root of it that should be fought tooth and nail, not the problem these games are a symptom of. I guess where we disagree is the reaction to this game. I’m sure the creator has his reasons and perhaps they are valid. Almost everyone who has played it has expressed an element of guilt for their participation, so perhaps he has even succeeded.I simply meant I wouldn’t play it due to the fact that I already found the subject matter offensive and was surprised people were playing it going “Oh this is horrible”. Its kind like the joke of the two guys who find a brown pile in the footpath, they look at it, they sniff it, they taste it. They conclude “Its definatly shit, lucky we didn’t step in it”. I’d rather just assume it was shit and avoid it ;)
I’m not intelligent enough to understand satire, so I am disgusted by this game.
You are well and truly intelligent enough to understand satire and your irony is appreciated given this morass of indignation ;)
wow you guys are pussies. pedophilia is fucking awesome and priests fucking altar boys is what it’s all about. seriously, being offended by anything like this is the same as tattooing “I HAVE NO BALLS” on your forehead. and then “EXCEPT FOR IN MY MOUTH”
precisely the aim of the game surely?
Derek “You know, I just figured there wasn’t enough controversy on TIGSource…”
Bad Taste, a movie by the now famous Peter Jackson. “I’m a Derek, and Derek’s don’t run”
Derek’s, with chainsaws or without. Not running from things since the 80’s.
@Mandrake42 Okay, I see where you are coming from now, and I agree with pretty much everything you say. Sadly, though, there are an awful lot of people here arguing that “it’s just harmless, goofy fun”, or else saying something like “it’s not my cup of tea, but who am I to judge this game’s merits? If someone else gets a kick from it, so what?”. This discarding of common sense in the name of tolerance and “artistic expression” is what was bothering me about all this. And it’s not just this game, this game is just the latest in a movement I’ve been noticing creeping up in the indy game community to put every sick or weird game that comes along on a pedestal as something that needs to be defended from all the “oppressors of artistic expression in games”, instead of just admitting, like you say, that it looks, smells and tastes like crap, and therefore probably is.
@nullerator Hahaha, you know, that was probably more effective than anything I wrote.
@ David
It is strange that we seem to have come full circle. It seems shallow that certain indie developers seem to pick subjects to base games upon that appear more based on their attention grabbing crassness than their actual intrinsic value. On this we both seem to agree. Here is to more “Everyday Shooter” and less pedophile priests. Id much rather the indie scene was remembered for its innovation rather than its indignation.
Bullshit. Nobody’s holding this up as art.
@I Like Cake
Sorry if that was confusing. I do tend to ramble a bit. Let me try to distill what I meant.
I thought Mandrake was saying that if you think something is wrong, and might make you feel icky, then don’t complain that is disgusting when you check to see if it really is as bad as people say and it mades you feel yuck. I was trying to point out how that is silly, since if you don’t check it out, you can neither: a) know for yourself if it is wrong or not, and b) if it is wrong, argue why. Part of being able to debate about why things are wrong is understanding and knowing something about the thing you are talking about. Otherwise you are just spouting air.
But since that was a reply to my misunderstanding of what Mandrake was saying, my reply probably does seem pretty out there to people who understood him correctly. Sorry about that. Heck, for all I know, it still does.
Ilia - http://www.glgarden.org/foreverman/brasseye.html
Yeah, I don’t think anyone is touting this game a some sort of great masterpiece.
However, the game does make a statement, now, whether you think that statement was a valid one is up to you to decide.
Games like this are meant to provoke a reaction of some sort (preferably a constructive one) that is designed to potentially affect your thinking in such a way as to incite action against a certain issue.
This game = awesome
This thread = awesome
Seriously, people, are your satire circuits shorted out or something? A lot of you apparently need to watch more South Park.
@ Hoawan
Yeah I agree no-one ever touted this as art, no-one is that crazy I would hope :)
I’ll be honest I cant even speak as to the gameplay as I haven’t even played it. Just reading the write up was enough to make me think it wasn’t for me.
@ Skladicpoet As to provoking a reaction. Well its certainly done that :)
Can’t we just all agree that candy is delicious?
There’s some in my van.
awesome. yet wrong. yet awesome.
If you start offering that candy to school kids I’m outta here :P