Google removes politically questionable video game

Sauce: NZ Herald

Google has removed a game called Bomb Gaza where the aim of the game is to fly Israeli Jets over Gaza and drop bombs on militants and avoid civilian casualties.

The game itself sounds like an interesting idea. If it used a fictional world it would probably slip under the radar but would've been a better way to go about it. However I can't help but wonder if the developer(s) were trying to make a political statement through their game.

What are your thoughts on this duders. Unwarranted censorship? Or justified due to the offensive nature of the content? @patrickklepek have you any thoughts regarding this game?

Surely they were just trying to make a fun game. Nobody could EVER think it had anything to do with real life. I mean my missile command clone: Shot Down over Ukraine is totally on track to come out soon.

Is this seriously a question? Yes it's offensive. Yes it's politically motivated. Yes it should be removed.

At least the premise of the game is to "drop bombs while avoiding civilians". That seems a tad better than the real life situation at the moment.

Of course this is offensive and politically motivated. I think it should be allowed to exist and even sold, but Google is under no obligation to host it in their store.

I don't think they were trying to make a statement.

If I owned a digital distribution storefront and that was on it, I'd probably take it down too.

However I can't help but wonder if the developer(s) were trying to make a political statement through their game.

Is this sentence serious? I'm genuinely asking, not in a condescending way.

I don't know the game is like, but this could easily be political. The point could be to illustrate that it is impossible to bomb Hamas without killing civilians. And you are supposed to take with that information what you will. That could just as easily be a justification of the civilian casualties or a reason not to attack in the first place.

I would also like to point out that a game like Super Columbine Massacre RPG would probably suffer the same fate on the Google store despite being extremely profound. Some people think that any game made about a serious subject demeans it.

Why were people blaming Google over it? They realize that certification for the android app store is basically automatic right?

I think you answered your own question there.

If it wasn't automatic it would take like 100 employees full time in different time zones to take care of the sheer number of apps being submitted all the time.

It's too literal. They should have been more subtle with their political references. It would have been easy to make it not so direct.

As it stands it's very offensive and makes sense it would be removed.

Actually while the Google Play store is automatic, the Apple App store is not. Apple does in fact pay a very large amount of people to approve apps. The process takes about a week on average.

I think censorship from companies like Google and Facebook are reaching an all time disgusting high. Both companies are so far up their liberal daddy's asses, it's just scary.

I haven't seen it, but nothing that is described here is offensive. It covers a real world tragedy. If this was about Hamas launching rockets at cities, would the response be the same? I have to wonder if it would be. It may have been removed but I am quite certain the reaction would be very different.

I am not in favor of censorship unless it is truly horrendously offensive. A game portraying an attempt to engage in responsible warfare is not that. Now, if it showed Palestinian babies being blown to pieces in a graphic way, MAYBE I would understand. It sort of depends on the game.

Let society decide if they want to encounter it or not.

I can, to an extent, respect Google taking this off their app store, if only just, because it is just that, a curated marketplace. It starts to get weird when you have stupid shit like Facebook stopping people from expressing their support for a side of a conflict that Facebook considers either wrong or controversial.

If this really did break the "rules" by being overly graphic or something, I can understand that. But if all it did is portray a real conflict? I'm going to say that's pretty terrible.

Because censorship is bad! Except when you feel some first world guilt about it, then it's totally okay.

The question is, what triggered that system? Was it that it was overly violent? Or was it just that it involves Gaza? They create their system, so whatever the reason for it being removed, it's their fault, even if it wasn't intentional. Which I highly doubt to be the case. I also doubt it would have made it on to the store and then been removed for any reason other than complaints being raised and those complaints finding another level of curation, possibly a human level.

That's sort of like blaming robots for the I Love IDF facebook page for being removed despite not breaking any Facebook rules, while pro-Hamas stuff continued to be allowed to exist. It seems awfully convenient.

Been watching a lot of liberal mainstream media? They drop pamphlets, and use warning shots well in advance. That's not trying to avoid casualties? It's hard to avoid in a society that encourages martyrdom, sadly. And a society where a lot of ugly minded men gain control and take advantage of things like their culture's embrace of martyrs.

Strongly encourage you to open up a bit about the conflict between Hamas and Israel and how that impacts Palestinian civilians, if you think trying to avoid civilians isn't happening already. Just because civilians die doesn't mean you aren't avoiding them. You have to understand the area of the world that this takes place in to see the real situation.

I do agree that Google doesn't need to have it up. I just feel weird when they try to step in for political reasons. If it's wrong to create a politically charged app, is it any better to remove it for politically charged reasons? It may not be the case, again I don't know why it was really removed specifically. But I wouldn't put it past Google to do this as a way to take a side in the issue.

Censorship in any way is bad.

I'm not sure we really want to get too much into the over-arching conflict, but from what I've seen over the last few decades, both many within the Israeli military and extreme Palestinian militants seem to care more about "winning" than avoiding hurting innocent civilians. In a way, they act as though no one is an innocent civilian, and that justifies far too much in the ongoing war.

It's a mess, and it's certainly more complicated than one side being absolutely right or justified in all they do.

Though, again, as far as games like this go, I don't think people shouldn't be able to make their offensive takes on serious issues; I can just understand why Google and other stores may not want to host it for sale.

Censorship sucks, there is no happiness to be found here.

It's certainly in poor taste. The shock value of making a game from an on going conflict somewhat overshadows any message it's trying to put across.

Turning the tragic deaths of innocents into a game and making the player an active participant is too on the nose.

A clever fictional sheen could have made this a clever and potentially touching satire, instead of trivialising an active conflict.

Game sounds like it should burn in hell.

You know who would be burning with it though?

Countless games and movies. Some American-made and about Americans. Some about the British, some about the French, some about the Dutch, some about Etc and so on until you list near every country on earth.

I wouldn't play this game and it's a lame idea imo but far bigger budgets have been spent turning tragedies into funny shooting galleries.

you fly over Baza with Misrael jets trying not to kill civilians

Our mainstream media leans heavily on Israel's side. Also how do pamphlets, phone calls, and smaller bombs 3-15 minutes before a bombing properly warn people to run away in a small country they can't leave and where even U.N. schools get bombed? Hamas are human pieces of garbage but that doesn't make Netanyahu any less of a war criminal.

this infringing on my freedom complaining is so dumb. thats not what freedom of speech is. google has every right to remove garbage. the game was made purely to send a message not to be a fun thing.

maybe right now isn't the best time to be making games like these

If not now, then when?

I'm curious, how does everyone feel about Tropico 5 being banned in Thailand; what parallels and/or differences does that situation share with this particular game being removed if any?

@euandewar:

Well yeah...why? Was I stating the obvious too much? :p

there isnt one reason i could ever think of that i would be okay with censorship of any kind.so basically this shouldnt be taken down.if people dont like it they dont have to play it,and if enough people dont buy it they wont make it again.basically let the market decide what it wants to buy.

There is a difference between censorship and not publicizing something; there are other ways the developer can make their game available on Android, the game is in poor taste and Google isn't obliged to put anything on the Play store.

sure and if you want to put that up on your website go sideload on your phone thats fine but I dont think google has an obligation to keep everything up in their store.

Well it's a private store, so Google can choose what content they want in there. That's retail curation and it isn't censorship. No one is entitled to have their game in the Play store. No one is restricting these folks from making this game, Google is just choosing not to distribute it.

Can't say this particular game looks like a big loss.

they are multinational company with stockholders to answer to. I dont blame them.

no one is infringing on your rights. A company decided they didnt want someones political message disguised as a game in their store.

+1 I agree with this. Be smart, be subtle!

Going to take an entirely uneducated guess and say the political motivation of the game is to show how it is impossible to avoid civilian casualties when bombing / artillery shelling an area as densely populated as Manhattan island.

Is that assumption accurate? Probably not.

Being banned in a country by that country's government is actually censorship. Being removed from a company store because a business doesn't want to associate with your shitty pandering bullshit isn't.

Here's the thing guys, because your garbage gets pulled doesn't mean you get to scream censorship. Can these people still publish this game in other avenues? Yes. It's not fucking censorship. Xbox won't publish my FMV game that's just pictures of my ass. CENSORSHIP.

Being banned by the military government from even being released in the country is different from an app no longer being officially hosted on a privately owned app store. So, it would be illegal to sell Tropico 5 in the country, as the military government censored its release. A private company like Google deciding that they don't want an offensive app to be on their store is up to them. Those who made the app can still put it out for people to get, because the government hasn't outlawed it.

The only parallel would be that an authority is showing discretion in what they allow. The big difference is one is a government(a military dictatorship) and the other is a private company(Google). The government not allowing it at all means there is little chance anyone will get the game; that effectively censors the whole game through the government's legal authority. A private company not allowing it on their store means it will likely be more difficult for people to access it, but no one will go to jail for selling, providing, or playing it. Historically, private entities have understandably shown their own discretion at what they want to buy and sell.

Personally, I can understand Google's move here, and those interested in a game like that can legally get it by other means. Tropico 5 being banned in Thailand by the military government is terrible, and stores in Thailand should have the right to decide what games are and aren't sold in their stores. In my opinion, there should always be some legal means for acquiring a game, even if there are restrictions on what that entails. The military government in Thailand is clearly doing this for questionable reasons; though, even with good reasons, this current ban would not be the right way to handle it.

Actually, looking at footage of the game it seems that is exactly what the game is. It looks like you drop a bomb and it hits a building, destroying it. But every building contains more civilians than legitimate targets, meaning that it's impossible to hit only the legitimate targets.

I'm curious if the game has any win or lose conditions, and if so, what those might be.

Because, these days the internet is in a constant furor over anything that might be even the slightest sign of the demon that will kill net neutrality. There are legitimate reasons to fear for the freedom of the internet these days. Verizon and Comcast are real threats. This dumb controversy is most certainly not a threat or even a sign of a threat. This is a non-government entity expressing it's freedom to say "We don't want to appear to support your controversial views by giving you a platform to stand on."

I don't remember when it became censorship to refuse to support the views of others.

Perhaps next we should ban Papers, Please for offending people who have been subjugated by statist violence, specifically in Eastern Europe and Central Asia as its meant to embody. Perhaps we should ban Cart Life for making mockery of the working poor who live hand-to-mouth. Perhaps we should ban The Killer for making mockery of those who died in the Killing Fields.

Censorship leads to a culture of stupidity and effective isolation.

I find that those clamoring for 'games as art' only wants games as art they're comfortable digesting. If the events that happen in the game make you uncomfortable, don't worry, you're not alone, that's just how we feel. That doesn't mean the game should stop existing.

Jesus, some people really need to have a better understanding of the definition of censorship. So all those years ago when my college music store refused to stock my shitty garage band's burned CDs, it turns out it wasn't actually because we really sucked, turns out we were being oppressed the whole time!

Censorship sucks.

This game sucks.

The thing is, it didn't stop existing. Google didn't destroy the game. They stopped selling it. There's a big difference. The developers are free to take their game elsewhere.

I can't say for sure but from what I've seen, this game seems like less like "let's make a poignant political statement about these current events" and more like "let's be as offensive as possible because lol." Maybe I'm off but I'm going to go out on a limb and say nothing of value was lost.

This is a bit different. When a group of people complain about a creative work in order to prevent its distribution, that is most definitely censorship. That is what happened here.

When it comes to marketplaces like the Google Play store, there are content policies that developers must comply with. Whether Google is in the wrong or not to censor this game comes down to whether or not it complies with their stated policies.

When the line between government and corporations has been blurred as much as it has in the USA it's more than a little disingenuous to say corporate censorship is a-ok.

anyway, I guess they should submit their game ideas to the Google Ministry of Truth first.

It's pretty funny so many people in this thread feel perfectly at ease passing judgement on what is acceptable and what is not. Perfectly happy to make decisions for others. Thank you kind citizens!

@brodehouse said:

There's a big difference between a game being banned and a company deciding to not publish a game on their market place. Also, I don't think games like Papers, Please and The Killer being banner or not published really follows as a consequence of what happened with Bomb Gaza. Papers and The Killer are well thought out games that attempt to deal meaningfully with the issues they depict, rather than take simply advantage of them.

Though, disappointingly, none of outlets I've seen reporting on games like Bomb Gaza and Gaza Assault seem to have made any effort to actually talk to the creators.

It's not censorship. Google is well within their rights to determine what is and is not sold/available on their platform(s). I wouldn't want this shit on my own platform, if I ran one. Now, if the government banned the game altogether, or something to that effect, then it would be censorship.

As it is, it just sounds like a fucking stupid attempt at trying to make "clever" political commentary through video games. If you're going to comment on an ongoing atrocity, you'd better make damned sure that you do it tastefully and skillfully, and not like a goddamn ham-fisted 14-year-old coding in their bedroom with American Idiot on repeat.

Everyone wants to be Jonathan Blow, but most people just end up being Jonathan Suck.

Okay. This may be only your opinion, or by observation to be true, in fact. A statement like yours, instead of something by the 'liberal mainstream press' or by Fox News was exactly what I was hoping for. Personally I do not trust much these days because of the saturated media manipulation going on lately. With reputably Israel spying on Kerry, The hostage the world flipped out about actually dead at 'some' point, and the covert motivations of a HIV prevention crew from the US in Cuba today,( and I am one of those bleeding heart Liberals Moderates), I do not trust much anymore. Good to hear the game was probably working short of the line of good old fashion sicko.

So I just want to add this bit of context:

After a bit of research, I've learned that this game developer's only previous game was something called "Space Invaiders Shooter" (original spelling retained), which was only noteworthy for its hilariously blatant copyright infringement:

The game was soon taken down from the Google app store (no doubt shortly after a cease-and-desist letter from Taito) and reappeared with altered sprites three months later as "Space War New Era":

They also have a shovelware app simply called "Piano".

So before anyone starts declaring these people (or, almost certainly, this person) as the champions of free speech in the digital age, maybe you ought to get a good look at the horse before you decide to bet the farm on it.

Something I want to remind you guys of: censorship isn't always through purely legal means. Messages can be informally censored, as well. I'd like to say communities do this all the time, but I'm pretty sure I'm reaching with that one. Still, it's on the right track.

haha cool, a video game making light of a bunch of innocent people dying, pls dont take it down, censorship!!!!

Get over yourselves

Is 'Censorship!' the new buzzword that our community is going to be misusing now after our fling with the misuse of 'pretentious' has started dying down?

Happy to see many voices of reason recognizing that this is not censorship. At least you can sideload anything you want easily on Android.