For what its worth I hope that kid sees my video and actually watches it up to the point where I call him out, artist to artist.

At 11/19/13 12:44 AM, Cross666 wrote: For what its worth I hope that kid sees my video and actually watches it up to the point where I call him out, artist to artist.

Don't you have to earn the title of artist...?

At 11/19/13 12:48 AM, JakkRunt wrote:

At 11/19/13 12:44 AM, Cross666 wrote: For what its worth I hope that kid sees my video and actually watches it up to the point where I call him out, artist to artist.

Don't you have to earn the title of artist...?

The title of "artist' is about as subjective as calling his little game a piece of "art"

At 11/18/13 12:58 PM, TomFulp wrote: I think a lot about that quote from Batman, "You either die a hero, or live long enough to become the villain." So in this case, NG has just survived long enough for me to finally turn my back on what some considered the most compelling thing about the site.

I think NG has the best creative people on the web and if NG didn't exist, I wouldn't find this same mix of people elsewhere. I don't know how much of this mix has been won by our support for controversial content, vs the myriad of other factors that make NG unique. I hope interesting people keep showing up and surprising us with interesting creations.

Personally, when I first stumbled upon NG back in '06, controversy played no part in becoming a fan; the silliness & fun it offered was what did it. This is something ENTIRELY different, and not fun by any means; EVEN IF there was a good purpose behind it, it sounds to me like it was done in the completely wrong way to begin with. Although, that does beg the question, why is the V-Tech game still there? I've never played either, but considering they're both by the same person, I'll assume it's in the same vein as this one is.

You were stuck in a "You're damned if ya do, and you're damned if ya don't." situation; this was the decision with the least backlash. And honestly, the fact that you even bother to give a shit about what everyone here thinks speaks volumes, knowing ya can't please everybody.

Not only that, but THE PARENTS OF THOSE KIDS were the ones who, not only respectfully, but FULLY ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THEY REALIZED THE INTENT OF THE GAME, requested its removal due to UNDERSTANDABLE EMOTIONAL TRAUMA, not a bunch of irrelevant, whiny bitches complaining about political correctness! This was an act of respect for the only people who ACTUALLY MATTER in this situation! So yeah, needless to say, I'm behind you on this one.

(Sorry for all the caps, but I felt I needed the emphasis on those particular points, on top of the underlining, as some people here don't seem to quite get it.)

One last thing, though, that I gotta ask you: If those parents hadn't said anything, would you have allowed the game to stay up?

On another note, I never realized that Pico's School was made around the time of those shootings......although, come on, Pico was saving the school from a NAZI ALIEN and her followers, who, by the way, were the ones actually shooting up the school in the first place. Because of this, I never would've associated the 2 anyway.

Not saying to ban this, but I tried it and had to quit after the second scene. It said to "Kill your mother." Now I understand it is just a game, but I enjoy games to tell people about. There is no where/way I could explain or defend this to anyone else in the world. If anything this game would only cause problems in my life not solutions. A lot of people may not have children, but everyone has a mother.

This is not even mentioning that in this game you play a bad guy. Game like GTA have you play as a bad guy, but it gives you background on the characters so it does not feel as yourself. Even Fallout, where you make your own choices, there is background on the characters before you do anything. The game just felt too direct.

Now would it be smart to ban it on Newgrounds? Yes. Should it be banned? Tom, I remember playing Pico's School when I was around 10 so I looked up when it came out... It came out in 1999. That was the same year of the Columbine Massacre. For you to say it is too soon would only contradict yourself. With that said by banning this you are throwing the rules up in the air. What is acceptable and what is not? By giving them what they want there will be more pressure to clean up your site. You have kids and you felt for this... There is a game called Kill-A-Baby where you choose whether to kill a baby or not. You see insane people killing their kids on the news, how do you defend this? I understand the game, it is about shock-value and stupid laughs because we can never do this, but not everyone gets it thus because people do not understand. What do you do? If someone says their baby was killed do you keep it up?

All this does it throw a big ball of confusion into the mix. I started coming to this site by accident, I looked up Hamster Dance and was brought to a page where you shoot hamsters dancing. Soon later my cousin came on for some guy running from the mob in a point in click shooter. My friend started coming because his friend showed him a game where you pleasure a girl why she sleeps. I showed a couple of my buds that game, they started playing and showing their friends. So what you are doing is censoring what this site is... or at least was. So what is this site now?

I will always enjoy coming to this site because of what it is not what it was. To me this site is about not taking things too seriously, it's about enjoyable games/movies that make you smile because they are charmingly stupid, and it's about having a good time. When everything else is thrown into the mix it is taking things too seriously, there is no charming only stupid, and there is no good time. When everything is said and done we come here for the games that are made not the controversies. This will be a small grey area that very few will know about or even remember in Newgrounds long, successful, and even more successful future.

At 11/19/13 12:44 AM, Cross666 wrote: kid

he's four years older than you

At 11/19/13 12:51 AM, King-Duckford wrote: I was here before there wa a Portal, back in the Assassin html days. <snip>

I find your post extremely moving. It does seem like the process of keeping controversial or provocative websites "alive" simultaneously "kills" those aspects which made them controversial or provocative in the very first place. If it is true that you either "die a hero" or "live long enough to see yourself become the villain", maybe it is because every hero eventually faces a decision between survival and compromise.

I didn't know about the Sandy Hook Massacre game until I read this topic. Hmmm... I forget the name of this particular effect.

The game itself quite possibly slipped through censorship if it did not directly allude to Sandy Hook or have "Sandy Hook" in its title, but then, it wouldn't have received the amount of attention it deserves. It tackles the issue gun control, acts as a reminder of the massacre itself, and raises the question: Why would anyone do this? Halfway through the game, I felt numb to amount of lives I was taking, because of the amount of violent media I've already been exposed to. Yet, this game brings to light how anyone, anywhere could have done something like this. So what amount of psychological pressure lead this person to commit a crime such as this? I think that's what its basically getting at.

Plus - Should everyone be trained to use firearms?
Does this have something to do with a distorted self-image (Mirrors flash randomly)
What does this say about Americans?
The US has killed many innocent children and pedestrians in the Middle East, and have had a history of doing so in the past (S. America, etc.)
not always intentionally of course, but still. So why is this a big deal?

At 11/19/13 01:08 AM, S3C wrote:

At 11/19/13 12:44 AM, Cross666 wrote: kid

he's four years older than you

Listen, watch the video all I am getting is -

1. On the whole, it's a pretty tasteless game, I think pigpen is beyond doing cheap publicity stunts like this and is more than capable of putting out tasteful, original content.

2. Don't justify lifting the ban or not having banned the game due to the possible publicity it could have generated.

That's it. I already agreed with another user in that the whole artistic integrity felt kind of shafted on the whole reasoning for removing the video in the first place. At the same time I don't feel like it should have been an issue in the first place.

Tom is a hypocrite he made pico's school (TEN DAYS AFTER COLUMBINE), and allowing to keep Vtech Massacre and the Pillars of newgrounds was to provide a safe place for artists to submit content regardless of subject (minus racism and discrimination etc) and when Tom removed that due to pressure from special interests he compromised that integrity.

At 11/19/13 12:51 AM, King-Duckford wrote:

Once the last vestiges of what Newgrounds ever meant are gone, the last of us will go with it, and there will be no Newgrounds.

From one bitter vet to another, I salute o7

People still bitching about Tom taking it down?

Tell you what; you same people bitching about the removal of the vid start paying Tom to keep the site up (+ a little profit), and I'm sure he won't mind complying with your bitch ass ideas.

Until then, STFU or make your own damn Newgrounds where you can say all types of offensive edgy bullshit.
Nevermind, don't stop bitching; keep complaining.

It makes for great entertainment.

At 11/18/13 11:58 AM, TomFulp wrote: Over the years, a number of highly offensive games and movies have been published on Newgrounds and despite the hatemail and being dropped by just about every ad company in existence, we held firm on a policy of anti-censorship. Today, however, I pulled a reversal on that policy and maybe it was a huge mistake or maybe it was the right thing to do, I'm sure there will be a variety of opinions on the matter.

It's your site, Tom. You've got the freedom to do what you want. Keep your site the way you want it. The trash does indeed occasionally need to be taken out. It's the nature of things. People do similar things all the time, and that's ok- until that one person steps over that line, and at that point, something gets done. I approve of your decision here.

This game, however, had a certain level of artfulness and craftsmanship to it. There was a visual and technical quality that revealed a serious level of effort and passion.

It was nicely animated out, but quickly took a dark turn.

It also had a political message I personally agree with; a statement on gun control and the problem of gun violence in the US. It attempted to demonstrate how things can play out differently with changes in our gun laws.

I took it to say that if guns were outlawed, if a killer decides to kill, he will still find a way to do it, using whatever is available to do so. I agree with that thought.

It made you feel and it made you think.

It did so, however, in the context of the Sandy Hook massacre, recreating the event and putting you in the role of the shooter.

Newgrounds has faced harsh criticism in the past for standing firm on not censoring distasteful material, namely games about school shootings. All I can say is that this game took things to a new level in terms of the age of the victims and the realism of the terror they faced on that day.

For those of you who had not played it, it was not a 'fun' game. It was not comical. It was dark, and cold, and sinister. As you entered any room, the teacher would begin to escort the children out. A few of them stayed in their seats, frozen and trembling in fear as you approached them. This is where it crossed the line.

So how is it different from Pico's School or similar games? Other games have been offensive, and yet, they still had a comical feel to them, and they managed to remain disconnected from reality and heart enough to still be accepted. Pico's School was comical and still outlandish enough that it still fell well within the line of acceptability.

That was not the case with this game. It referenced a still open and tender wound before you even start the game, by referencing Sandy Hook in the title. After that, it never got fun. It never had comedy, or jokes, or humor, or anything to redeem it. It was cold, and methodic, and merciless. When it got to the point where the player chooses how to react to the children, it crossed the line of decency.

Kill the homeless bums in a game if you want. Kill the enemy soldiers if you want. Drive your car over the pedestrians and hookers on the sidewalk if you want. In a game, that's all ok. Don't harm the children, though. Children are precious and innocent, and if you're not appaled by the thought of harming a child, even if it is a game, you really need to examine yourself. Really.

Today I'm choosing respect for the Sandy Hook parents over respect for NG's censorship policies.

You did the right thing, Tom. I salute you, and stand behind you. ,:)

Either decision on this matter puts a knot in my stomach.

It shouldn't, Tom. As the head, you occasionally need to step in and make a command decision. You didn't delete something on a whim. You didn't do it to harass an author. You did it out of respect, and that is sorely lacking in today's world. You did the right thing here.

At 11/19/13 01:49 AM, Exedor wrote: Kill the homeless bums in a game if you want. Kill the enemy soldiers if you want. Drive your car over the pedestrians and hookers on the sidewalk if you want. In a game, that's all ok. Don't harm the children, though. Children are precious and innocent, and if you're not appaled by the thought of harming a child, even if it is a game, you really need to examine yourself. Really.

Exedor, I would wager that no one in this thread is not appalled by the thought of harming children (or, for that matter, carelessly driving over pedestrians and hookers). But there is no good reason why games should not be able to examine appalling subjects.

You can still play it via his website http://googumproduce.com/

At 11/18/13 11:58 AM, TomFulp wrote: I was personally contacted by Sandy Hook parents

should told 'em to fuck off 'cause it's just the internet. not everybody's gonna feel sorry for you even though it was a tragedy.

while that may seem insensitive to some, it's the truth.

humanity is a ravenous beast.

Wasn't this a medal game? I'm pissed I lost my medals >:(

At 11/19/13 02:01 AM, RealFaction wrote: I do agree with the fact this game was EXTREMELY offensive

Meh, not really, it's just unsettling, like watching a video of a man slowly squeezing his testicles and then eating a live hamster.

Look at this bullshit and proceed to facepalm.

I think every party in the whole thing has a legitimate argument so it's hard for me to take a side.
Except for the fucking news media and shit, the fucktards that say things like a guy in the video I posted "hurr durr we should tell the president bout this game".
And people continue to sit by and watch special interest make a mockery of freedom of expression, while they try to pressure the gov to fucking ban everything and turn us into a police state.

I understand why Tom would take something like that down, all said. It's his business, and he can do what he wants. I disagree with people that have no involvement trying to make a big shitstorm and force him to take it down, though. But I know that he's also human and probably would rather take something like that down on a personal level, rather than because of external pressure.

I just found the "game" and personally think it's disgusting and disgraceful to the victims of that tragedy, however. The game's cringeworthy, but I do see the gun control statement in it, Just saying I politically disagree with censorship except in necessary and extreme cases where it violates someone else's rights, or hurts another person in a direct physical way. Still got the impression this was a terribly insensitive thing for someone to make.

This was the right thing to do Mr. Tom.
Sometimes people's feelings are more important than a game.
You did the right thing by respecting the feelings of especially those who lost their loved ones in the tragedy.
The game's developer has talent and he can create great games in the future, keeping in mind not to make anything so offensive. Humor (offensive) has limits which should not be crossed.

I think you made a wise decision, Tom.

I'm curious - was this game made by the same people who made the game about the Columbine shooting?

This subverts everything I ever knew this website to stand for.

We are deeply disappointed in you, Tom.

-TwoStar

At 11/19/13 01:49 AM, Exedor wrote: Kill the homeless bums in a game if you want. Kill the enemy soldiers if you want. Drive your car over the pedestrians and hookers on the sidewalk if you want. In a game, that's all ok. Don't harm the children, though. Children are precious and innocent, and if you're not appaled by the thought of harming a child, even if it is a game, you really need to examine yourself. Really.

Are you somehow indirectly implying that murder is okay, as long as it doesn't involve children? I mean why stop there. If you're not appalled by killing bums, pedestrians, and hookers too, then you need to examine yourself. Not just meant as a statement against you, but since you bring it up, why are people so interested in committing acts of violence in video games? And why do some feel the need to express this artistically in games- why not just stop at Chex Quest & Crash Bandicoot & Super Mario

At 11/19/13 02:01 AM, RealFaction wrote: Offensive jokes can only go so far, not THAT far though, otherwise it's crossing a line which makes anyone an inconsiderate jerk.

I believe all kinds of humor are acceptable, but there certainly are places where certain humor is not acceptable. For example, if you're douchebag boss dies of colon cancer (God forbid) you wouldn't want to say "oh looks like he finally got his head out of his ass" at his funeral; but there is humor and irony behind that joke. The internet, and Newgrounds of the past in particular, wouldn't set the line where you want it to be. That aside, I didn't play Pigpen's game (just listened to his in-game message) and I don't think there was any humor to be derived from it- moreso so just a serious message that was distastefully, but artistically communicated. Sure it makes him a huge dick (he already was one) but he has every right to publish his content.

At 11/19/13 03:02 AM, KelpTheGreat wrote: I think you made a wise decision, Tom.

I'm curious - was this game made by the same people who made the game about the Columbine shooting?

Ha
induced unintentional irony in 2 lines

hey tom i've wanted to do this for like 9 years so umm hey what up

I've never posted on the forums before, and doubt it'll be read, but for what it's worth, that game was totally insignificant, not even worth looking up, another wannabe shocker like the Colombine Super RPG. Newgrounds will be alright.

I now present, the heaviest two cents I have ever given in a forum post.

I first want to start out by saying, that I am all for free speech. The good and the bad. I'll even go so far as to say, that no matter how offensive, insipid, or downright hateful the words are, the words must be protected and preserved, not blanked away into oblivion.

However with this value I have, I do not hold them without feeling, and understanding what the opposition is going through, for the mothers and fathers of school shooting victims have good reason to be upset, even so I may oppose them in viewpoint of whether or not something should be taken down.

I tend to think about mass murders a lot, in a sense that they give me nightmares. Whether it be the Jewish holocaust in Nazi Germany, or these school shootings like the kind that took place at Sandy Hook, they deeply affect my train of thought. I feel terribly sorry for families who are broken because of them. There doesn't go a day in my life where the thought of these tragedies doesn't cross my mind. I mean, imagine if you are a father and mother, you raise a kid. That kid becomes your life, you spend a lot of money on that kid, not to just get affection, but to prepare that kid for the world. This kid, is not just an investment either, because you grow attached to that kid. You spend so much time and money on that kid that you age and physically weaken over the years, but, in a supposedly loving and ideal relationship that I'm certain a lot families have or at least have a fragment of it, that kid is with you, that kid loves you, and that kids ends up practically being your best friend and only companion besides your spouse. Then one day, you send that kid off to school, and BAM! Your offspring was just one out 56 of victims in a school shooting. Elementary school? Nine years of love and dedication rendered meaningless. High school? 18 years of love and dedication shot down the drain and rendered meaningless. It is a heavy loss no matter what.

What these families go through is genuine grief. It's hard to boldly defend free speech in the face of a grieving mother without coming out as some kind of heartless monster who whacks to people's suffering, but I stand by that it must be done no matter the cost.

So in that reason, I think Tom, while absolutely good natured, and well intentioned in his decision, made a huge mistake in his decision, and I have a quite couple reasons why I think it was a mistake to take down PiGPEN's recent game.

Number 1 was already pointed out by ZJ:

I think you've opened up floodgates, Tom. I understand your concerns about this game, but I feel like you're allowing for various groups of people to want various forms of content removed in the future and they'll be more justified in their request since this was taken down.

And let me put this bluntly: Who will bring more views to this website? PiGPEN or those angry parents? Can modern NG really afford to piss off its content creators?"-ZJ

...And floodgates will be opened, because now that Tom Fulp has allowed one game to take the fall, he has allowed other games to get the opportunity to be removed if deemed offensive enough, and there are plenty of games more offensive than The Slaying of Sandy Hook. Distressed families of other victims will now wonder why the suicide bomber game is still up, or why the 9/11 game is still up, or why "Chocolate Rambo" is still up, or why the V-Tech game is still up, for they will think that you do not care one bit about their tragedy. If you then appease to their demands as well, pretty soon, a great deal of portal history will vanish into the ether as if they never existed, because of your appeasements that are undermining your core values on art preservation.

Which brings us to the number 2 reason I disagree with Tom's action.

Compared to the other "Bastard!" type games and movies, The Slaying of Sandy Hook, aside from the "Eagle Eyes mode", is not that offensive.

Before I get into this, I should comment on the author himself, and other miscellaneous but relevant things as well. PiGPEN, is some what of a goofball troll, in some ways, almost in the spirit of the Star Syndicate, Maddox, 4chan's /b/, Encyclopedia Dramatica, and notorious Newgrounds Bastard, Eddie Ballin. Now get this, I kind of like PiGPEN, mostly for Troll Game(a webcomic) and Morphemon Duelists(an anime monster training genre parody), and I "get" his humor. It's "troll humor" and it basically a form of schadenfreude that amounts to writing and saying offensive stuff that raises eyebrows, but putting it in an over-the-top style context, and crossing the line twice with it. The laughs mostly come from either the over-the-top context(like "this is too ridiculous to be serious or sincere") or poorly written "angrish" comments by those offended by the work in question. It is similar in nature to the late Andy Kaufmen, who entertained everyone simply by pissing other people off and pushing their buttons for his own amusement.

Which brings us to this game, which I will compare to V-Tech rampage( a far more offensive game by PiGPEN, which, I have a lot of mixed feelings on, because although it made a few funny jokes, introduced me to some good music, it also gravely offended me and at least rubbed me the wrong way. For those reasons alone, I have avoided making a review for that game under comments section because, for the sake of other people's feelings I would feel I would be drawing attention to it just by giving it review be it a few stars or no stars.).

Wow the media love this shit. I'm glad I don't live in america. We have some pretty fucked up sensationalist "news" shows here but that was some class A bullshit. Leaving out essential facts from the story? finding the most unintelligent lowlifes they can, on the street and asking for their uninformed opinion? playing the part of moral activists?..why isn't this sort of shit illegal yet?

At 11/19/13 02:38 AM, Mattcat454545 wrote: Look at this bullshit and proceed to facepalm.

I think every party in the whole thing has a legitimate argument so it's hard for me to take a side.
Except for the fucking news media and shit, the fucktards that say things like a guy in the video I posted "hurr durr we should tell the president bout this game".
And people continue to sit by and watch special interest make a mockery of freedom of expression, while they try to pressure the gov to fucking ban everything and turn us into a police state.

I understand why Tom would take something like that down, all said. It's his business, and he can do what he wants. I disagree with people that have no involvement trying to make a big shitstorm and force him to take it down, though. But I know that he's also human and probably would rather take something like that down on a personal level, rather than because of external pressure.

I've been a long time lurker for years. I just want to say that I agree with how you've handled this.