Maybe if Kennedy was shooting back with a BFG or rockets it might be fun but this sounds very boring.
I can certainly see the distinction.
I don’t much care about the distinction, but I can see it.
Now that’s where I don’t see a distinction. It’s okay to profit off the death of an American president if you make a movie, or write a book, or draw a comic, or record a song… but not if you make a video game?
I’m just guessing here, but you’ve never actually played a video game, have you?
That said, while I got a little dark chuckle out of the idea, I don’t see how the execution could be at all fun or interesting. A whole game? Around firing three shots at a single target in a static enviroment? Sounds more like one of those “Punch the Monkey” banner ads, not a marketable stand-alone property. Once you’ve looked at the cover of the box, you’ve pretty much got all the enjoyment it’s possible to get out of the concept.
You don’t care, that’s obvious. Maybe if it was your relative that was being virtually shot—your relative’s death being virtually re-enacted so that people could take virtual shots at him, you would care. Or not. :shrug:
I didn’t say it was always okay. I said that some of these can be “tawdry” as well. But that interactive “Shoot [Teddy Kennedy’s dead brother] and get points” element is not there.
Answer me this: do you see why Teddy Kennedy, and Caroline Kennedy, and the rest of JFK’s family might have a problem with this? Might consider this “despicable”? Or do you think that they’re overreacting or have no business feeling offended?
Sure I have. Not my favorite thing, but definitely.
Probably not. I mean, compared to the guy who actually killed him, some yahoo trying to make a few bucks off his death four decades later is barely going to register with me. But you’re right, I’ve never been in that position. I have no idea how this makes his family feel. So, I’ll make you a deal. If my brother is ever elected president, then assassinated, and then, somtime around 2045, someone makes a video game out of it, I’ll come back to this thread to share how I feel about.
In all fairness, however, I really should admit that I’m an only child.
So why single out this game? (Which you didn’t, I know, it’s a rhetorical question.) You want to complain about the tawdry exploitation of the murder of an American icon, let’s start with Oliver Stone and work down the list. You could do a rant a day, and it’d be a good five years before you ever got to these guys.
But, of course, this is a <gasp> video game! It’s different than a three-hour long motion picture from one of the largest studios in the world! Never mind that 99.99% of the people who learn about this game’s exsistance will do so from someone who is complaining about how tacky it is. Great job, guys: there nothing any entrepreneur values higher than free publicity. If Derleth is not hyperbolizing, by posting this thread Reeder has already helped them to sell one more copy. Good job, Reeder! As always, your antics are primarily useful in effecting the exact opposite of what you desire.
And as for it being “interactive,” please. You show me a work of art that’s not interactive, and I’ll show you something that isn’t art.
I’m sure they do. I am not them. It is not necessary for me (or for you, for that matter) to get offended on their behalf.
John F. Kennedy was the President of the United States. In many ways, he is one of the most famous of the whole bunch. He has become a part of American culture, and that is a tie that trumps those of blood or affection. He belongs to us, now. All of us. No one has the right to dictate how people feel about Kennedy, or how they express those feelings. This fact may cause his family some pain. That’s a shame, but it’s one of the prices you pay for being associated with celebrity. And it’s certainly not like his family hasn’t profitted immensely off of that celebrity over the years. The Kennedy name still has immense political and social currency, and the entire clan has not hesitated to spend it when ever possible. Well, this is the other side of the coin.
That’s just dandy. So, what does that have to do with me (and Reeder, and others here) expressing our disgust or distaste over this game? Do we get to do that, or not?
So? I didn’t single out this game, Reeder did, and CNN (and others) did before him. It’s timely. I read about it, I had an opnion, I shared that opinion. I haven’t seen any Oliver Stone movies recently, can’t really remember them really well, but if someone starts a thread about a crappy Oliver Stone movie and I have an opinion, I’ll very likely share that opinion. That is what one does on a message board.
So? It’s different. No shit Sherlock.
I create artwork. Several types. People “interact” with it in that they look at it, or listen to it, and have an emotional response. However, they don’t color it in, or add something to it, or punch buttons and earn points. There’s different levels of “interactivity” in creative works. Some is passive—watching, listening and reacting emotionally. Some is a lot more involved and interactive than that.
It’s not necessary for me to, but am I not allowed to? Good grief. It’s an opinion. I’m not asking for the damned game to be banned or censored. I just think it’s horribly tacky. I wouldn’t feel sorry for this game company at all if the Kennedys sued.
Dictate? Obviously not. Call them “despicable” if that’s how you see their behavior? Absolutely yes. Or do you disagree? Are not we allowed to be disgusted by someone else’s behavior and express these feelings?
Of course you do, but you have no protection against ridicule or belittlement.
Personally, I think a simulation like this, if it is accurate enough, can help dispel the notion that it was somehow impossible for Osward to make the shot, since apparantly it wasn’t that difficult a feat. If there’s anyone (other than the Kennedys) I expect to get upset, it’d be Oliver Stone.
I guess I should give up on my JFK Jr. flight simulator.
You might want to shelve the Ted Kennedy driving game and the Michael Kennedy ski game, while you’re at it.
It all wants to make me play Jack Ruby.
The exact same engine was used in a docu I watched recently. You can clearly see (in the game as well coz I just downloaded it) that the governor is sitting to the left and below Kennedy thus eliminating the “magic bullet theory” and in the docu they show the three shots time exactly the same as Oswald’s shots. It looked like a relatively easy shot for an experienced gunman. Didn’t seem to rushed either. I remember thinking I’d probably be able to do that if they gave me control of the simulator. Now I’m trying not to spend money on it but it’s tempting
Why stop here? They should release the “Magic Loogie” segment from “Seinfeld” as a video game.
You are the guy on the Gravely Road, attempting to spit at Kramer and Newman. Get it just right so that the loogie leaps from Kramer’s temple to Newman’s elbow.
With voice apperances by Michael Richards and Wayne Knight. And a special apperance by Keith Hernandez.
Is anyone else reminded of that Quantum Leap episode where the hero (as Oswald) shoots JFK?
I want to be the guy in the white suit.
Dana Gould did a bit about him.
No. No you do not. <Waves Imperial scepter>
Yeah, but if you think this game is disgusting or disgraceful, complaining about it only raises its profile, which seems counterproductive.
That was sarcasm, actually. My point is that it’s not any different than any other work of art in any other medium that tries to cash in on Kennedy’s death. Except this is a video game. It’s a new medium, that does not have the traditional and legal protections that surround other mediums such as film and the written word, and so, like we have to do with every new artistic medium that comes down the pike, we have to do the ritualized Dance of Outrage and Legislation around it until the pols and the offenderati get it through their thick skulls that video games have exactly the same 1st Ammendment protections as every other vehicle for self-expression.
To be clear, the last paragraph is not about you, since you’re not trying to ban the game or pass laws limiting what sort of expression is allowed in video games. It’s just a related gripe.
I disagree. I don’t think there is a meaningful difference in interactivity between mediums. Between works within a medium, yes, depending on the quality of the art in question. But I find it very hard to believe (I’ve obviosuly not played the game, so this is a very qualified statement) that the level of interactivity involved in this game is any where near the level of interactivity needed to appreciate, say, a Salman Rsushdie novel, or a Stanley Kubrick movie.
No, you’re not allowed, dammit! I already waved my scepter and everything!
Okay, seriously, yes, you can express any opinion you want. I think in this case, expresisng a negative opinion is only going to help the people you find despicable by raising the profile of their game. If you don’t care about that, that’s cool. Ignore me. If you do care, you’d probably better serve your interests by keeping mum about it and hoping that the entire thing is forgotten as quickly as possible. Especially if you’re concerned about the feelings of JFK’s family, as the longer people talk about this game, the longer it stays in the media, and the more often they will be reminded of its exsistence and the attended insult and disrespect.
If it’s the reference I’m thinking of, Scott is far from “Scott Free!”
He’s headed to death row, or the booty house.
Okay, okay, very funny.
I might buy that if I was complaining to the newspapers, raising some sort of “awareness” campaign, but I’m not. I’m just expressing an opinion on this thread. Big whoop.
I doubt Kennedy’s family sees it this way. Some works of art “cash in” in less creepy way. The fact that the this game was designed so that people could shoot at the President and gain points—that is a detail I supsect doesn’t set well with the family, and, with a lot of us.
A person has to put in the effort to appreciate a Stanley Kubrick movie, but a lot of people can’t do that, won’t do that, don’t have to do that. A person doesn’t have to do much at all to virtually shoot at JFK and cheer when they have good aim and hit him. That’s pretty damned interactive.
Oh bullshit. I’m not buying an ad in the LA Times protesting the damned game. I think a lot of creative works suck, and, dare I say it, I sometimes express that opinion. I particularly express that opinion on a message board, because that’s what people do on a message board. We shouldn’t feel obliged to supress our opinions, in the fear that somehow, our viewpoints expressed on one piddley thread are somehow going to impact the sales of crappy work in any significant way.
On SDMB? In the Pit? How is “raising its profile” here counterproductive? Does “raising the profile” of bad co-workers here make bosses want to hire them?
I think there’s a meaningful difference between watching a Jackie Chan movie and (virtually) punching someone in the face. YOU press the button. YOU are the direct cause of the action. Not so with film or printed media.
Kentucky Fried Movie
Playing devil’s advocate here, at least the game is claiming to fight ignorance and dispell the conspiracy theories.
Of course, it would be a lot more fun to have the choice of playing a cuban in grassy knoll, or mafia hitman by the railroad tracks, or Roger McDowell on the gravelly road, or whatever.
…or the Cigarette Smoking Man in the sewer.