Click here for the link.
Here's a sample of the lengthy Q&A that goes on.
Q. What do you say to those out there who point to the shooting as a reason why your game should not have been made?
A. This is a question with very deep implications that are worth dissecting, I think. If one is interested in making something for the public to view--be it a painting, a book, an album, a film, or a video game, should the POSSIBLE harm that may come out of this work be grounds for its suppression from society? This is, in a sense, pre-crime. If you believe in what you're doing and you want to express yourself, the expression should be primary and any interpretations that come after must always remain of secondary importance to the creation of the work itself.
On another level, the entire correlation between the Dawson College shooting and my game is unfounded. Though it was far from shooter Kimveer Gill's favorite game, it was among the list of games he liked to play. I can only assume, after 150,000+ downloads of the game, that it is also a game that other people like to play (ones who won't be going postal). What else did Kimveer like? Black clothes? Goth music? Pizza?
1 comment:
We hear these arguments a lot after an incident like the one in Montreal. While I don't think that there is any direct link between a game like this and the shooting, I *do* think it's naive to assume that a culture saturated in violent representation is entirely unaffected by said violence.
Post a Comment