|
Sunday 16 August, 2009
My second time playing Super Columbine Massacre, I tried to do a different thing. Instead of creating a massacre, I wanted to see what happens when you do the “anti-massacre” per se. Instead of killing people, I decided to try to go through the entire shooting at the school without coming in contact with anyone, much like I did my first time playing after I became a bit weirded out by killing the kids. What I discovered was that, while playing the game, the only person you have to definitively kill is the janitor to get into the video room. Even then, I’m not 100% positive that you MUST kill the janitor in order to succeed in the game, which is ironically enough, to kill yourself. Other than that, killing anyone in the game is a complete option, and an option only. Much like we discussed in regards to the game Manhunt, killing is not required within the game and it is completely up to the player whether or not he or she will kill the kids in the game. As a player, one is presented with many, many, many different people to engage and kill, as the player is free to enter any room, which some of them are filled with probably around 20 or so kids, and then the library has many more, along with the gymnasium. The opportunities to kill and massacre people are fruitful and nearly endless. It is only up to the player to decide whether or not to kill any more people. As I had said, I had made it all the way to hell by killing only one janitor, so in regards to the game, I succeeded, because I made it to hell. It is actually much easier to succeed in the game without killing anyone because I thus never risked the chance of being attacked and dying. So, ironically in a game entitled Super Columbine Massacre, the best way to beat the game involves not massacring anyone. In a way, this reflects the real life massacre, too. During the actual shooting, it was reported that the real life Dylan and Eric were overheard saying how they had lost the thrill in killing people and just walked around the school for nearly half an hour peeking into classroom windows and scaring people before taking their own lives. It presents a strange parallel in this game where one doesn’t need the thrill of killing anyone if they don’t want it. If they get bored, they stop. If they don’t want to, they don’t have to. If they want to kill everyone, they can. The designer of the game left all options open, and its only up to the player to decide the path to take to get to the final destination, which can be reached all three ways. So will the player max out and create a total massacre? Will he or she just kill a few? Or will he or she not kill anyone? It’s all up to the player, and putting such huge variables on the player’s shoulders makes the themes and questions regarding what it is to conduct a massacre even more prevalent and worth discussing.
|
