I've said before that no one should deem to criticize a game they haven't played. Therefore, I played this thing.
Muslim Massacre is a stupid game. It's a straightforward third-person shooter, graphics reminiscent of the eight-bit era, but with aiming via mouse movements and Robotronesque gameplay -- without, you know, the wit or complexity of Robotron.
It surely wasn't designed to explore anything about the space of possible games, or offer anything novel, or of particular interest, in terms of gameplay. It also, unlike Super Columbine Massacre RPG! is not a thoughtful exploration of its subject material, nor does it offer anything like the pathos and emotional context of that game's mid-game photography of the aftermath, nor does it offer anything like cogent commentary on the easy resource of digital games to cartoonish violence.
It's just a stupid, adolescent, thumb-against-the-nose-and-waggling-fingers "fuck you". It exists, apparently, simply to create the controversy it has, in fact, created. It does not, in itself, have anything particular to say. "Making a broader meta-criticism," as the99th would have it? Don't make me laugh.
Mind you, the 1st Amendment is not totally a dead letter in this country (no promises for whether it remains such after President Palin is sworn in), and the twit who created this game has a perfect right to create it, yadda yadda. Yes, protection of free speech requires us to protect both speech with is offensive (which I don't view this as, particularly), as well as speech which is stupid (which this game surely is). But for all those who have attacked this game -- and therefore given it attention, and exposure it in no way deserves:
If some idiot made a blog posting saying we should kill all the Moslems, would you pay attention? If someone posted a similarly stupid YouTube video, would it receive this level of press attention? If someone did a Photoshop image of bin Laden fucking a goat, would you think it noteworthy, or worth a protest?
Why does the fact that it's a game make this any more noteworthy?
Games are just another medium. You can say stupid things as easily in a game as in any other form. You can also say very important things in the form of a game, and I hope we'll see more of that in future.
But get over it. Muslim Massacre is not important. It's just another idiot talking, in code instead of in prose or images or video. The world is full of idiots -- and making things in code is easier and easier, you know.
Stop it. Return to your regular programming. Don't play this thing.
The problem solves itself
Not having played this thing and just responding to your comments:
The idea that a game can cause controversy simply by being a game is nothing new. We went through all this years ago with SCMRPG. (And before that with GTA3, and Mortal Kombat, and Death Race...)
What this proves is that other people have figured it out. If you have a message and you want lots and lots of people to pay attention... well, make a controversial game and you'll get all sorts of press that you wouldn't get if you just posted, say, an open letter on your blog.
Pretty soon, more and more people will figure this out, and we'll be flooded with controversial-for-the-sake-of-controversy games, until we reach the point where everyone has seen it a thousand times already, and it's no longer new or novel or dangerous, it's just another medium.
And then the problem is solved. Ta-dah!
costik, you should stop
costik, you should stop letting the99th post already.
I already weighed in on
I already weighed in on the99th's post, but I just found this from gamepolitics.com
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/17/muslim-massacre-creator-my-apolog...
In response to Danny Ledonne's question of if the game has an actual message:
"Eric Vaughn (game creator): Not exactly, basically my message was the Muslims need to suck it down and stop getting offended by everything. If they learnt to just ignore people, things would be better. It's not just a message for Muslims, it's for people in general. There are people all around the world who will do things that make you mad. If you search for them, they are easy to find. Just get on with your life."
Edit: as another aside, this guy apparently also designed Soldat. http://www.transhumandesign.com/about.html (Sigvatr)
fake apology
I think I fell for the apology and his reasoning that the game is merely a "Borat" of videogames. Call me dumb and naive for thinking people on the internet aren't as fucked up as they seem. (after seeing his comic strip: http://electricretard.com/ I seriously believe this guy has school shooter potential :( )
BUT, if the game itself hasn't provided any meaningful message, so has the controversy around it. Look at Call of Duty 4. Or America's Army. Those are the same stories, only set in an artificial world were "collateral damage" doesn't exist and wars are "fair and just". Muslim Massacre slabs those ideals around a bit, in a way that gave me chills.
What does the average American think of the war in Afghanistan? Brave men in uniform? Cool helicopters taking out tanks in self defence?
What about the drone that apparently killed a bunch of children in their homes? Where's the videogame about that? What should it look like? Is that a taboo to mention?
Unlike propaganda games (like the disturbing Ethnic Cleansing or, although not quite as racist: America's Army) Muslim Massacre at least doesn't blare a message and leaves room for a discussion. Although, admittedly, that statement by Eric Vaughn, which I haven't heard about until now, might contradict most of what I initially thought about this game.
Meh. Whatever the case, you don't have to like/respect the game. Despite all I wrote, I do not...
Barbara Streisand would be proud...
"But for all those who have attacked this game -- and therefore given it attention, and exposure it in no way deserves:"
"Why does the fact that it's a game make this any more noteworthy?"
"But get over it. Muslim Massacre is not important."
Oh bitter, bitter irony, you dance for me so very seductively, swirling and swaying your way down the intertubes into your own, delicious oblivion.
Mediums
If some idiot made a blog posting saying we should kill all the Moslems, would you pay attention? If someone posted a similarly stupid YouTube video, would it receive this level of press attention? If someone did a Photoshop image of bin Laden fucking a goat, would you think it noteworthy, or worth a protest?
Why does the fact that it's a game make this any more noteworthy?
Two reasons.
First: Your list above is too decontextualized to be useful. If the blog was my little livejournal that gets all of 40 people reading it, no, I very strongly doubt anyone would give a rat's; if the blog was boingboing, you better believe it would get lots, lots, lots of attention. As to YouTube - local news is always hungry for stories decrying the ills of technology (unironically, no less, despite the fact that technology enables their very existence, but that's another rant) and I've seen less worthy YouTube clips get a 30-to-120-second spot devoted to them on a slow news day.
Second: Even in the wake of Jack Thompson's disbarment, many people who aren't gamers take the "murder simulator" explanation to heart. But again, context is everything. Thematically there is very, very little difference between (what I've read about*) Muslim Massacre and (what I've read about*) America's Army - in both cases you play a member of the American military, in both cases the enemy is depicted as generically middle eastern, in both cases the point of the game is body count über alles. Obvious technological differences notwithstanding, the only real difference is that MM calls them "muslims" and AA calls them "enemy combatants".
*As a Mac Mini owner I don't have access to either of these games without emulation technology the computer lacks the horsepower to employ.
Yeah, this whole thing plays
Yeah, this whole thing plays out to me like a Robert Anton Wilson novel. I had a lot of fun playing MM for it's visceral qualities, skin-independent, but it didn't take me for a psychological ride like SCMRPG or Cost of Life or any other notables. So there you have it.
Also my review was somewhat playing at being a controvery-provocation for the sake of it, another layer to the meta-dance or whatever.
Sometime's it's fun to think, and sometimes it's fun to blow away randomly generated sprites. Maybe the significance of this game is conflating the two in contrast to US foreign policy, maybe.