November 22, 2004

• I don't find it as offensive as some seem to, but then to me political figures, the President in particular, be not sacred cows. The interest in the JFK killing, of course, is whether Oswald dun it alone. I think this justifies the simulation (I wouldn't call it a game). The makers say they support the Warren Commission findings, but that appears to belie the point of the software. The problem with this is that family members still survive, & can be offended. I don't see any other reason to be disturbed by it, frankly.
• I'm voting for "crass"... It feels to me to be another way to "train" our young people. Perhaps, instead of 'how to shoot a political figure' action game, we should send them out to do something healthy for a change, like maybe go to an NBA game.... oh, wait..... guess we're just screwed.......
• If this were Grand Theft Auto, Oswald would punch the driver out, steal the limo, and take it to the car crusher with Kennedy still in it. Now *that's* entertainment.
• On the offensive scale, this rates pretty low compared to some things I have seen online, but it's absolutely crass. Totally unnecessary.
• disgusting.
• Ok, how many of you guys have actually played computer games recently? You think this is "disgusting"? Compared to what, Doom, Half Life, GTA? Why? Outline your reasoning. And don't say "those other games aren't real". Neither is this.
• Historical experiment or crass entertainment? Can't it be both?
• I was so disgusted, I immediately clicked "Back". And "to the left".
• Can't it be both? Well it can be both education and entertainment, but I would have thought that the historical worth of something like this would belie it's potential crassness. One of the things that this makes me think of is both the value and perils of putting people in video games to teach them about history. This is a very stark example: there are a lot of people who falsely believe that Oswald couldn't have shot JFK, and this is a very good way of debunking that. Why is this important? Because the conspiracy theorists have gone a long way towards distorting popular understanding of the mid-Cold War. Similarly, by putting peole in realistic combat simulations, people learn important lessons about how battles really work. Movies and stories usually end with the hero surviving. It makes the story more dramatically satisfying. However, it also leaves the viewer with the impression that dying, in battles, is something that happens to other people. By putting people in video games, you can help teach them that getting shot, for example, happens all the time and pretty much at random. This should, theoretically, make them more sympathetic to the plight of the soldier, and less inclined to beleive in picturesque lies about combat. However, there's another side to this, which is that the violence inhearant in this stuff is pretty much consiquence free. When you're guy gets shot, you don't feel real pain. When you are killed, you respawn. So the danger is that these games teach people a whole new and different set of lies.
• Ah, bravo: a magic banana for flashboy. A counterargument, too, but only incidentally.
• "those other games aren't real". Neither is this. Those other games don't use real people in them. Close enough? It's moot though, flashboy wins.
• I'd say it's pretty poor taste; the tragic deaths of real people should not be sources of entertainment. It's not the same as imaginary people. But I agree, Flashboy wins.
• In other words, what petebest said.
• Maybe if this ever stood a chance of putting all those silly conspiracy theories to rest, it would be good. But who would take a computer game seriously?
• "Those other games don't use real people in them. Close enough?" I don't think it makes any difference. A question about a murder is a question about a murder. There have been many computer recreations of this & other crimes in the past, just this one is open to the public. "..silly conspiracy theories.." Well.. if you say so. There were too many bullet fragments hitting various things around Dealy Plaza to have come from Oswald's 3 shots, & the 'magic bullet' penetrating several bodies whilst staying relatively pristine was patently crapola.. but there you have it, just my opinion. What I would like to know is why the warren commission X-rays of JFK's skull show a massive wound in the front of his head, extending to the bones around the eyes, when the autopsy photographs do not. The two sets of evidence patently disagree with one another in a way that is impossible to explain without postulating some shenanigans after-the-fact. History is replete with real conspiracies. All you need is a bunch of crooked people deciding to do something behind closed doors, no involvement of the Illuminati, Reticulans or the CIA are needed.
• Maybe i'm misunderstanding it - is it a "investigate it yourself" first person type of thing or is it a game game, like "Hey lets shoot JFK"? The former would be okay I guess, the latter - not.
• Conspiracy debate in 5, 4, 3 ...
• Maybe i'm misunderstanding it - is it a "investigate it yourself" first person type of thing or is it a game game, like "Hey lets shoot JFK"? The former would be okay I guess, the latter - not. Again, what petebest said ... game = tasteless, recreation for educational purposes = not tasteless. At first glance, I thought it was a game, but now I'm just not sure!
• The Glasgow-based firm Traffic said "JFK Reloaded" was an educational "docu-game" that would help disprove conspiracy theories about Kennedy's death. "docu-game"? Bullshit has been called.
• That's Edutainment!
• I wouldn't call it a game, most of the parameters are set. The point appears to be to equal Oswald's shooting. As a 'game' it has extremely limited playability. I suppose this boils down to an argument about semantics.
• Coming next: Presidential Shooting Gallery. Starring Lincoln, Kennedy, McKinley, and Reagan as an extra bonus stage. The great thing is, when you blast McKinley, Chester A. Arthur pops up, his eyes bug out, and his mutton-chops wiggle. I think that this would have been less controversial if it had been a "Let's Assasinate Franz Ferdinand" game instead. I mean, really, who cares about Franz Ferdinand?
• Mrs. Ferdinand. :)
• The first world war was started by turkish coffee.
• The Franz Ferdinand fan club, of course... Sorry.
• The part that caught my attention is that the screenshots seemed to be exactly the same as ones used in a program I recently saw on the Discovery Channel. Sorry, I can't find any shots/clips of the actual show, but I swear they had little video clips that included those exact same shots. Any ideas?
• Also look similar to the Peter Jennings "The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy" documentary (where the computer models were done by somebody called Dale Myers). I think that, with the anniversary last year, there were probably a lot of TV shows with computer models of the Zapruder footage - and there's a limit to how different they can look... Anyway, the company, Traffic Games, don't even seem to have a web presence. The guy quoted in the articles, Kirk Ewing, seems to have been schlepping around the UK game dvelopment scene for a fair few years now. I doubt there's any direct connection, but I suppose it's possible.
• Those accidentally hitting former first lady Jacqueline Kennedy stand to lose points. The game even offers blood effect visuals that allow the players to view the effect of the bullet hitting the president's skull or body. sick.
• New film shows JFK moments before assassination
• So, this footage just shows up now, because there has never before been much interest in this story?
• Oohh, I thought this was finally the fabled Babushka Lady's footage. It looks a little too pristine, doesn't it?
• Scientists Cast Doubt on Kennedy Bullet Analysis: Multiple Shooters Possible, Study Says
• Gah! Curse you H-dogg!! You've won this round! *crumples cool link, stomps off*