http://masswepray.com/
On Wii?
I think I'll wait for "Mass we Pray II: To Antichrist" or something simmilar! ;D
There's no way thats serious.
I mean.. thats just bollocks.
It's an advert for Dante's Inferno, a PS3 game where you battle through the depths of hell.
No, seriously.
:o You're right! I didn't believe it until I clicked the "Read more" link.
How the !@#$ does this make people want to buy Dante's Inferno!?
The more I know about that game, the more I'm convinced it was conceived when the authors were tripping.
incidentally i would DEFINATELY buy a praying game.
I'd feel blasphemous.
Odd where we live in a time where no one minds at all battling through hell but the mere mention of a game about prayer yields sidelong glances and grumbles of trying to force religion on people. Not sure why a game about god is bollocks and a game about the devil is awesome since they're both biblical figures, but whatever.
I would have no problem with there being a praying/wishing game in theory.. I think it would be bollocks largely because it would be a shit game and because it's saying that God is real. Demony games dont claim to be fact :p
Battling demons is more fun than wishing anyway.
Altho incidentally I do like alot of games with God in.. God is a fascinating fictional character and many many good narratives have been based on the character.
Every game which deals with demons and hell and vampires etc will have God in.. God is the necessary other side to the coin. So in fact most games have god in.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Fri 27/11/2009 13:12:15
Odd where we live in a time where no one minds at all battling through hell but the mere mention of a game about prayer yields sidelong glances and grumbles of trying to force religion on people.
Battling through hell automatically puts you on the other side of hell, i.e. the side of the angels, whatever your own personal beliefs. Many religions have different versions of hell and demons to be fought. You could even slip in references to Christianity, for example, or Mayan beliefs or whatever religious system you want to use as context, but people will still take it as fiction because it's the battle against evil that's the universal theme. Prayer however is usually very specific to a certain religion, and very hard to take as fiction. That's where people start feeling uncomfortable.
Hahaha.
Well, I'd prefer the game the Flanders boys were playing in a Simpsons episode where you have to shoot bibles at non-christians. Would be more fun I guess.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Fri 27/11/2009 13:12:15
Odd where we live in a time where no one minds at all battling through hell but the mere mention of a game about prayer yields sidelong glances and grumbles of trying to force religion on people.
It's because we're of the Devil's party, without knowing it. True poets all!
Quote from: ProgZmax on Fri 27/11/2009 13:12:15Not sure why a game about god is bollocks and a game about the devil is awesome since they're both biblical figures, but whatever.
Have you seen the two trailers?
I want this game. NOW.
It looks so cool. I've always felt so distant from Jesus, I'm sure this game will bring me closer.
Man, I'm so excited for easter 2010 :P
You also can't really compare the games as "a game about god" and "a game about the devil". Latter may still be right, but what we're talking about is a game about both, or neither. It's about what everyone does in real-life, and it's also not supernatural or stuff. After all, god doesn't "make an appearance".
But, on the other hand, I mainly agree with Calin.
Human Head Studios should totally do a spin off of Prey where instead of having Native American related special abilities, you get to walk on water and cure lepers and travel in giant fish. People in the bible got some pretty badass special abilities.
The game would be called 'Pray'.
Obviously.
There were already so many shitty bible games (mostly unlicensed ones though), I wouldn't actually be surprised if this would be real (if they just wouldn't use costum controllers, that looks just laughable).
Quote from: NsMn on Fri 27/11/2009 15:38:07
There were already so many shitty bible games (mostly unlicensed ones though)
Who are you supposed to license a biblical game to/from? ;D
Haha, I don't mean to the bible... I mean the company that produced the console it was for.
Yay! Another religion discussion! ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkNvQYiM6bw
Quote from: NsMn on Fri 27/11/2009 15:44:29
Haha, I don't mean to the bible... I mean the company that produced the console it was for.
Haha, ohhh, I was gonna say :=
Quote from: Khris on Fri 27/11/2009 15:59:48
Yay! Another religion discussion! ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkNvQYiM6bw
Aw, shit busted! I admit it, I stole all the information from the AVGN ;)
Talking of biblical games, this doesn't look too shabby...
http://www.heaventhegame.com/
What on earth is that??!?!? I wasn't aware of flying bulls and lions and stuff...
That website is horrible Stupot. -_-
The game looks like it could be fun to explore though.
"Bring your family closer ... to heaven" is ultimately the worst catchphrase I've ever heard. It's clear this is a joke but it's really funny! :D Plus has anybody else noticed that those controllers are furry?
Quote from: auriond on Fri 27/11/2009 12:11:04
How the !@#$ does this make people want to buy Dante's Inferno!?
It's viral marketing. It seems to be working!
How about We Mass-Terbate?
Sounds like fun. :)
Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Fri 27/11/2009 22:59:37
It's viral marketing. It seems to be working!
It's working in the sense that I keep being reminded that there's a game called Dante's Inferno, but it's not making my fingers itch to reach for my wallet. I really don't know how these things work. "Hey, lookit this prayer game! Who would buy a prayer game hahahahaha.... Oh hey, it links to this demon-killing game. Let's buy it." ???
Now if the title of the real game had been something like "Massacre", then I would see the appeal of a fake game called "Mass: We Pray".
Then again, most of viral/controversial attempts at marketing tend to woosh right over me.
Quote from: auriond on Sat 28/11/2009 00:16:19
Then again, most of viral/controversial attempts at marketing tend to woosh right over me.
So the hundreds of marionettes people have sent me by post
weren't viral marketing for your game?
Then what can it mean?!
I never get viral marketing until somebody points it out to me. Maybe I'm immune.
Or a bit slow.
Not that you really ever need an excuse to link to Zoo Race (http://www.zoorace.com/), but this seems like a good occasion. Horses on rockets and Christian rock music, what's not to like?
I've heard that the PR team of Dante's Inferno wanted to do a step beyond the usual EA marketing campain. Don't know if that's the best way to promote a game.
B.t.w. in what chapter of Divine Comedy is Dante a knight-in-shining-armour action hero, battling demons with a giant syt? Must have missed that page...
Quote from: Ali on Sat 28/11/2009 02:24:23
So the hundreds of marionettes people have sent me by post weren't viral marketing for your game?
Then what can it mean?!
It means that if you don't pass on the marionettes to 100 people within 7 days you'll have horrible terrible bad luck and your hamster will suffer from H1N1!!11!!!
The Zoo Race video is awesome. Because a typical day in the life of a librarian is totally like that.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Fri 27/11/2009 13:12:15
Odd where we live in a time where no one minds at all battling through hell but the mere mention of a game about prayer yields sidelong glances and grumbles of trying to force religion on people. Not sure why a game about god is bollocks and a game about the devil is awesome since they're both biblical figures, but whatever.
I can't speak for everyone else, but I don't think it's the moral issue of mixing religion and video gaming that makes people react.
I think it's the fact that
Mass: We Pray! is such a corny, mindless, nonsensical excuse for a "game" that it can't possibly be taken seriously - I mean, the very idea that you would use hand controllers and sims to practice your faith is simply ridiculous.
The game about the devil is a
game; it has a plot and a gameplay, it's designed to be exciting, not to let people practice satanism.
Quote from: Stupot on Fri 27/11/2009 16:37:29
Talking of biblical games, this doesn't look too shabby...
http://www.heaventhegame.com/
And here's a nice interview with the game's creator...
http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/interviews/547/
apparently God told him to make it.
Quote from: Andail on Sat 28/11/2009 12:31:52I think it's the fact that Mass: We Pray! is such a corny, mindless, nonsensical excuse for a "game" that it can't possibly be taken seriously - I mean, the very idea that you would use hand controllers and sims to practice your faith is simply ridiculous.
Exactly. There are some religious zealots who I believe would actually do something as stupid as this in an attempt to try and "spread the word" but in reality nobody in their right mind could take a game like this seriously.
I have a question for you all though. Why is it that believers in the theory of evolution get so heated over the fact that some people believe in the theory of creation? Both are widely accepted, legitimate scientific theory. There is supporting evidence for both. Neither has been proven or disproven.
I understand, again, there are religious zealots who can't wait to cram their beliefs down everyone else's throats, but how then is your behaviour any different? I can believe in the creation theory and believe in Christianity without constantly spamming the forums with "REPENT OR DIE" or any nonsense like that. Just because I believe what I believe doesn't mean I'm going to hold prejudice against someone of a different faith, even if that means an atheist or agnostic.
If I feel the discussion is appropriate I might discuss my own beliefs, but I don't try and tell people "this is how it is." In fact much the opposite, I generally tell people not to just take my word for it. If people are interested in what I say I tend to tell them to take a step of faith and go pray about it themselves.
So I understand not everyone has the same beliefs. And I understand that there are a lot of overambitious or overzealous people. I understand that personal beliefs are usually deep rooted and very sensitive subject matter. But I honestly just don't understand for example in that other thread why it's so abominable to think that some people (perhaps even, goodness forbid, a majority) believe the theory of creation in favour of the theory of evolution. Again, there is supporting scientific evidence for both, and neither has been proven as fact.
I guess what I'm getting at is why can't we accept that we hold different beliefs without having to hold that against each other? In short, why can't we be friends (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJTBPdVpdMc)?? :=
Quote from: monkey_05_06 on Sat 05/12/2009 14:11:05
I have a question for you all though. Why is it that believers in the theory of evolution get so heated over the fact that some people believe in the theory of creation? Both are widely accepted, legitimate scientific theory. There is supporting evidence for both. Neither has been proven or disproven.
What?
Creationism (just like the existence of (a) god(s) ) is a belief/claim, not a "scientific theory". And simple claims don't need to be disproven.
Widely accepted? Perhaps in the United states and some other countries (like Turkey).
Supprting evidence for Creationism? Please enlighten me.
There's a game based on the "Left Behind" series of books.
http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/left-behind-eternal-forces
Wait, I'm smelling a creationism/evolution debate!
EVERYBODY EVACUATE
Yes, remember children, it's only a game. :P
Quote from: Mr Matti on Sat 05/12/2009 14:31:19
Quote from: monkey_05_06 on Sat 05/12/2009 14:11:05
I have a question for you all though. Why is it that believers in the theory of evolution get so heated over the fact that some people believe in the theory of creation? Both are widely accepted, legitimate scientific theory. There is supporting evidence for both. Neither has been proven or disproven.
What?
Creationism (just like the existence of (a) god(s) ) is a belief/claim, not a "scientific theory". And simple claims don't need to be disproven.
Widely accepted? Perhaps in the United states and some other countries (like Turkey).
Supprting evidence for Creationism? Please enlighten me.
I'm glad someone took you to task on that monkey! :p
We have disproved creationism on several points. The Flood didnt happen, the earth isnt 6000 years old and mankind wasnt zapped into existence instantly.
Those are all demonstrable and simple FACTS
Legitimate scientific theory my arse...
Apparently whilst I wasn't looking during the course of the last five years all the
facts on what used to be called the "theory" of creation have been rewritten and it is now no longer even considered as a legitimate "hypothesis" and is written off as nothing more than the wet dream of a bunch of deranged fanatics.
As for the flood and the idea of being "zapped into existence instantly" neither of those have been scientifically disproved. I fail entirely to see how one could even suppose to definitively disprove the presence of water upon the face of the earth at various points thousands of years ago. Especially given the fact that the face of the earth itself is constantly changing with erosion, continental drift, etc. If creation had been disproved it wouldn't still be called the "theory" of evolution. Of course it's treated as if it's fact anyway.
Regarding the age of the Earth I've never seen anywhere that strictly states the earth to have been created 6000 years ago. The timespan of creation itself is debatable, much of the "historical" (religious based) texts on the matter have lost meaning in translation, not to mention the sheer fact that the modern Bible has been greatly edited and censored.
Quote from: Mr Matti on Sat 05/12/2009 14:31:19And simple claims don't need to be disproven.
I'm sorry, but isn't this the very
purpose of science? To effectively and definitively prove or disprove every single idea that may ever cross the realm of human imagination? Of course according to various articles on Wikipedia the purpose of science is simply to rewrite "fact" based upon popular opinion, as the "authorities" deem fit.
So pardon me if my sources on what was once called the "theory of creation" were somewhat dated. I hadn't been watching it like a hawk during the course of the last five years whilst the "facts" have been rewritten. Carry on then.
Also I like the way everyone ignored the point I was trying to make (albeit based on skewed information) in favour of pointing out how brain-dead I must be for having religious beliefs.
Does anybody else think that this game should in fact be called "Mass:
Wii Pray!"? :=
Quote from: monkey_05_06 on Sun 06/12/2009 16:44:14
Does anybody else think that this game should in fact be called "Mass: Wii Pray!"? :=
I'm guessing Nintendo didn't want them promoting their satanic next gen game by exploiting the Power Glove Gamecube.
Actually evolution has been pretty much proven.
Scientific fact: Gene mutation does occur in all species during transcription.
Scientific fact: These mutations can give an organism a higher chance of reaching the age of maturity without dying.
Scientific fact: Given a long enough period of time and constanty changing environmental factors (which we do have on earth), one species can end up looking and behaving radically different to its predecessors. (and no, there is no difference between microevolution and macroevolution, it's the same thing.)
There is not one thing that cannot be explained by evolution. (And don't give me that irreducible complexity stuff like bacterial flagellum or the eye, because believe it or not it can be explained!)
QuoteI'm sorry, but isn't this the very purpose of science? To effectively and definitively prove or disprove every single idea that may ever cross the realm of human imagination? Of course according to various articles on Wikipedia the purpose of science is simply to rewrite "fact" based upon popular opinion, as the "authorities" deem fit.
No, that is called shifting the burden of proof. Once something unknown is observed, a rational explanation based on existing evidences is created. If further evidence disproves the current explanation, a new one is formulated. That is the scientific process.
Since there is no evidence to support creationism and plenty of evidence to support evolution, there is no reason to attempt to prove something as outrageously ridiculous as creation.
Also, if evolution had to suddenly be disproved by new evidence, I wouldn't cry myself to sleep about it. I would simply change my opinion to the new explanation, as it would be the most rational one available at the time.
That, is the scientific way.
Theory, in a scientific sense, is the highest level of proof possible. Definitive proof is only valid in mathematics.
We also have the theory of gravity and atomic theory (both of which by the way have LESS supporting evidence than evolution) but no one questions those.
And yes the global flood HAS been disproved through geological records. It would be very very easy to detect a massive global flood in the strata but it just isnt there. It never happened.
Also the idea of being 'zapped into existence' have also been proven wrong due to a great deal of things. We understand a lot about the formation of planets and the evolution of species and absolutely NOTHING points to someone clicking their fingers. It just doesn't fit the evidence.
as for the age of the earth, biblical scholars date the creation story to have taken place between about 5500 BC and about 4000 BC.
They come to this age using the genealogies present in the bible starting with the creation of Adam (who lived till he was 930 years old by the way).
Christians who do not believe in evolution generally accept this time scale. (the pentecostal faith teaches the earth is likely to end within their lifetimes too)
I did read an interesting article on a theory about how a flood came to be mentioned in the Bible. In essence, it goes like this:
Black Sea area originally plains filled with people.
Straights then burst open, letting the entire Mediterranean Sea into Black Sea area. Massive flood ensues. Survivors tell stories of it.
Story mutates into Noah's Ark.
- Huw
Quote from: Phemar on Sun 06/12/2009 19:23:55
Actually evolution has been pretty much proven.
Scientific fact: Gene mutation does occur in all species during transcription.
Scientific fact: These mutations can give an organism a higher chance of reaching the age of maturity without dying.
Scientific fact: Given a long enough period of time and constanty changing environmental factors (which we do have on earth), one species can end up looking and behaving radically different to its predecessors. (and no, there is no difference between microevolution and macroevolution, it's the same thing.)
There is not one thing that cannot be explained by evolution. (And don't give me that irreducible complexity stuff like bacterial flagellum or the eye, because believe it or not it can be explained!)
That's great news that I hadn't heard. Perhaps you could explain how water based life made it onto land?
Quote from: Intense Degree on Mon 07/12/2009 10:29:40
That's great news that I hadn't heard. Perhaps you could explain how water based life made it onto land?
Through a series of gradual, step by step changes.
I want fins.
Where do I start? :D
Quote from: Phemar on Mon 07/12/2009 11:40:15
Quote from: Intense Degree on Mon 07/12/2009 10:29:40
That's great news that I hadn't heard. Perhaps you could explain how water based life made it onto land?
Through a series of gradual, step by step changes.
Thanks for clearing that up! ;)
Quote from: Ben304 on Mon 07/12/2009 12:07:48
I want fins.
Where do I start? :D
Jump into the sea, if you drown it's natural selection.
Quote from: GarageGothic on Mon 07/12/2009 12:36:56
Jump into the sea, if you drown it's natural selection.
I tried your theory and all I got were these gills.
Stupid gills :(
Damn, I knew I shouldn't have trusted Will Wright for lessons on evolution.
Quote from: Stupot on Sat 05/12/2009 10:45:46
And here's a nice interview with the game's creator...
http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/interviews/547/
apparently God told him to make it.
Prophets have been always mistrusted and mocked...
if youre truly interested to know how water based animals made it onto the land i can tell you :p
The first animals on land were arthropods. These animals dont have gills or lungs, they breathe using things in their body called sphericals which directly absorb oxygen from the air/water. It wasn't like a trout hopped out the water and gave the whole breathing thing a go.
However there are also animals with gills which live on land. The mudskipper for instance.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2340/2146897188_a72b27b898.jpg)
I stand corrected. I didnt realise you had photographic evidence.