What follows is a transcript of eToychest’s interview with Danny Ledonne, the developer of Super Columbine Massacre RPG, regarding the game’s recent removal from the upcoming Slamdance independent game festival.

Snackbar Games: To start off, tell me how you came to enter Super Columbine Massacre RPG into this year’s Slamdance competition. Thanks to the magic of the internet, I’ve seen a few differing anecdotal accounts in my research.

Danny Ledonne: Slamdance GGC director Sam Roberts contacted me last October and encouraged me to submit the game. I expressed hesitation based mostly on licensing issues but over the next few days he assured me that this wasn’t a concern and I then submitted my game to Slamdance. SCMRPG was named a finalist. Months later it was pulled. The rest is still unfolding.

SBG: When you were notified that your game was removed from consideration, what was your initial reaction? Conversely, what are your thoughts now?

DL: I was notified only after the game was removed (Thursday the 4th of January). I was led to believe that this was due to loss of sponsorship so I was quite understanding. Now this appears not to be the case at all and so I’m less certain what to think other than that this would’ve never happened to a film in the same circumstances (and the same subject matter).

SBG: Again, addressing the internSBG: there are plenty of people out there who are dismissive of the game’s removal from the finalist’s list because they believe the judges only intended to include the game for its controversial value. How do you respond?

DL: I can’t speak for the judges and I don’t know why they chose this game… but I really want people to see past the fact that it is simply controversial. It is also heavily researched. It is also a commentary on gaming. It is pushing what games are and what they can be. I believe it was on those merits that the game was chosen, not merely controversy alone (which, in my best estimation, is why the game was pulled out of the festival).

SBG: Slamdance has screened controversial games in the past. What is it that makes yours so different?

DL: Perhaps my game deals with a more uncomfortable subject matter. Perhaps placing the player in the role of a school shooter is too confrontational and discomforting for people. I’m not really sure since I still don’t really know why the game was pulled to begin with. Slamdance certainly knew what they were getting into by selecting the game, however; SCMRPG has a virtual paper trail of controversy already and if they weren’t prepared to deal with it they’d be better off not having courted it.

SBG: In an Artist’s Statement on SCMRPG‘s Web site, you talk about the need for more socially conscious games. What do you think needs to happen for games to become more widely accepted as literature?

DL: That’s something I’ve thought about quite a bit and have discussed with contemporaries of mine inside and outside the game industry. The first step is probably acknowledging that a game about 9/11 or Columbine or some other divisive topic can be valuable and moreover shouldn’t be “off limits” for videogames. This is a medium that isn’t for kids anymore. It has the potential to challenge mature audiences. It has the potential to reach people in a way currently impossible by other mediums.
Perhaps game developers need to consider making more literate work to begin with. SCMRPG includes passages from TS Elliot, Dante’s Inferno, and Friedrich Nietzsche. Why can’t more games engage players in a cerebral way? There’s no reason for games to be equivocated to toys when they can be crafted more like a documentary film or a political cartoon… or even something that doesn’t really exist yet because games are still “coming into their own” as a form of communication and art.

SBG: Do you think Slamdance has damaged the legitimacy of video games as a medium with this decision? For instance, no film or novel would be given this treatment.

DL: This has absolutely damaged Slamdance in this way; half the game developers have pulled their games out and USC Interactive Media has pulled sponsorship. Who would honestly submit an edgy game to Slamdance next year after this has happened? Only time will tell, of course, but the outlook for the GGC isn’t so good right now.

SBG: Is there anything else we haven’t discussed that you’d like to comment on?

DL: This is just something I’d like to throw out there: SCMRPG is one amateur game but has come to represent the beginnings of a movement in gaming: one toward games being truly artful objects that confront our world instead of simply distracting us from it. This idea isn’t going to go away; there will be more games about controversial issues and our culture is going to be faced with some very real choices as to how it deals with agenda gaming in the future.

What follows is a transcript of eToychest’s interview with Tracy Fullerton regarding the recent removal of Super Columbine Massacre RPG from the upcoming Slamdance independent game festival. Tracy Fullerton is a assistant professor at the USC School of Cinematic Arts, Interactive Media Division, and is co-director at the Electronic Arts Game Innovation Lab.

Snackbar Games: To start off, I’d like to play devil’s advocate – Doesn’t Slamdance have the right to change its mind if it deems the content of Super Columbine Massacre RPG inappropriate?

Tracy Fullerton: We don’t dispute their legal right to make this decision, but we do object to the decision in principle and are invoking our right to rescind our support.

SBG: There has been some buzz in the blogosphere that pressures from ‘backers’ led to SCMRPG‘s removal. Is it true that, as one of those backers, this issue was not discussed with you? Is Slamdance’s inability to keep an open dialogue with its sponsors more or less damning than the poor timing of their decision?

TF: The decision was not discussed with us at all — we found out after the fact. I think the decision should have been discussed with sponsors, as it changes the nature of the contest. In effect, it communicates that Slamdance will honor the best independent games that are not too controversial.

SBG: When I first heard the news about this incident, my first thought was that banning Elephant or Bowling For Columbine from consideration at any film festival would have dramatic repercussions, and yet the Directors of Slamdance found this course of action acceptable. What do you think prompts this kind of double standard? What needs to happen for interactive media, such as video games, to be afforded the same respect as, say, film, another medium which is still relatively young?

TF: I think that games are emerging as an important and expressive art that have the potential to be as important to the coming century as film was to the previous century. It is crucial that we recognize the right to free expression in this emerging form even while we are still learning to use it to communicate effectively. It’s clear that game makers are just now beginning to thing about how they use the form to express complex ideas. If we’re going to get better at it, we need support from artistic venues in this process.

SBG: Do you think this action on Slamdance’s part constitute some kind of sea change or, to try and be hip, a ‘selling out’? Given their inclusion of Waco Resurrection just a few years ago, it seems that their views on controversial subject matter are drastically different.

TF: I think it was a decision specific to this game, but it sets a dangerous precedent. Waco is a good example of a controversial game that they screened in the past, and supported in the same way they’ve supported countless controversial films. It’s an argument for the fact that there should not be a double standard between films and games.

SBG: All things considered, is there any chance of the Interactive Media Division sponsoring the festival again? If so, what would it take on Slamdance’s part to make it happen?

TF: I don’t know what will happen in the future. I certainly hope that Slamdance survives this experience and is able to grow from it.

SBG: Slamdance isn’t the only event of its type, though it may be the most high profile. As the spearhead of this protest, has your department considered attempting to host a similar competition in the future to fill the resulting void?

TF: No, we’re not thinking of that right now.

SBG: Have you played SCMRPG? If so, what are your thoughts on it?

TF: Yes, I have. It is a difficult game in terms of its subject matter. I found it deeply disturbing, but it made me think about the events in a way that no other media has done. I’ve seen countless TV reports, films, etc. on the tragedy, but this game took me through that day and implicated me personally in the events that took place. I won’t say I enjoyed the game, but it was certainly thought-provoking.

SBG: I appreciate you taking the time out to speak with me. Is there anything we haven’t discussed that you’d like to comment on?

TF: Just that this was an incredibly difficult decision, not only for us, but for the finalists who pulled their games from the contest, and that I only hope that out of that sacrifice will come a serious discussion of games and freedom of expression that helps the medium achieve a level of legitimacy as an art form.