The Bully Effect: Rockstar Damages Gaming's Reputation, All the Way to the Bank

There's very little that hasn't been said about Rockstar's latest offering, Bully. Spreading mostly from the mouth of gaming's most ardent opposition, Jack Thompson, the game procured a glut of negative press before details of the game were even known. Through it all, the developer stayed on the sidelines. What does Rockstar's silence say about them... and us?

When Bully was first announced at the 2005 Electronic Entertainment Expo, details were sparse. We were given a title, a developer, and this small tidbit of information garnered from the official company line.

Bully takes the Rockstar tradition of groundbreaking and original gameplay and humorous tongue-in-cheek storytelling to an entirely new setting: the schoolyard. As a troublesome schoolboy, you'll stand up to bullies, get picked on by teachers, play pranks on malicious kids, win or lose the girl, and ultimately learn to navigate the obstacles of the fictitious reform school, Bullworth Academy. Bully is the brutally funny debut title from Rockstar Vancouver and is expected to hit retail shelves in October 2005.

All of that sounds well and good, except when the general media public took a look at the publisher. Rockstar?! Don't they make those murder games? Certainly, this game would be even worse. Set in a school, can you even imagine the horrors that can be held within?

From anti-bullying activists to Jack Thompson, it seemed everyone was calling for an immediate halt to the release of the game. Ban, cease, stop production. Protesters even gathered outside Rockstar's HQ. And everyone's favorite lawyer, Thompson, was quoted as claiming that:

what you are in effect doing is rehearsing your physical revenge and violence against those whom you have been victimized by. And then you, like Klebold and Harris in Columbine, become the ultimate bully. [The game] shows you how to — by bullying — take over your school.

Keep in mind all that we know about the game so far: set in a school, tongue-in-cheek, stand up to bullies, get the girl. From where was all of this horrible information extrapolated? Why, from the developer's name, of course.

It even reached my little corner of the universe. Before I was following the game in-depth, I heard it talked about on a local radio show. The shock jock reported it as a Columbine scenario, dark humor perhaps, and was fielding calls responding to it. It was the elementary school phone game all over again. One word whispered to another, to another, to another, and into my ears. At the time I believed it, and rolled my eyes at how far Rockstar was taking it this time. I was unsurprised, and so I didn't question it. Neither, I'm sure, did many people.

Those of us who follow games know the rest of the story. Bully turned out to be mostly harmless, received a T for Teen rating, and Jack Thompson's court case to block the game for sale in Florida, mostly deflated now due to the rating, went unheeded and the game was sold as planned.

One thing remains curious throughout the entire scandal, though. Why was Rockstar so silent during the controversy? They could easily have told the truth about the game's content at any time, diffused the rumors altogether, and moved on. Why wouldn't they?

One explanation may be that they simply didn't think they would be believed. Just as Nintendo is known for its kid-friendly titles, and its rare adult game goes generally ignored, Rockstar is known for its penchant for the disruptive. Any attempt to clear up confusion could be seen as lies and cover-up, and probably would not do good for them anyway.

Another explanation could be that they knew the game's content, and felt they would be vindicated in the end. They continue to create the game as they always were, and eventually the protesters would just look foolish for getting so upset over something so harmless.

But the real explanation, I think, is that Rockstar has learned from its controversies and mistakes. They're the masters of misdirection, spin, and PR. While they stayed silent, Bully constantly stayed in the headlines of the gaming world, drumming up public interest. There's no such thing as bad publicity, after all, and capturing the public's attention so frequently kept the game fresh in people's minds. Why else would they bother to name the game "Bully," a title sure to raise ire? A calculated, clever advertising move on their part. Release the name, and let the protesters -- and their own reputation -- take care of the rest.

While this was an excellent move on their part, I can't say I'm enthusiastic about it on part of the gaming community. While they enjoyed the publicity, and no doubt are getting a kick out of getting egg on Thompson's face, the months of bad publicity won't be so easily overwritten by the sudden revelation of a fairly innocuous title. While we in the gaming community will know how the story ended, the average soccer mom won't be following so closely. What will she remember? "Columbine simulator."

This is the ignorant mindset that leads Congressmen to claim video games award "points" for "raping women." Damn straight, Congress; I thought Rapefest 2006 was really nothing more than a rehashed and uninspired Rapefest 2005. We need more creativity and a balanced point structure in our rape simulators!

Tasteless kidding aside, the general public isn't malicious towards gaming, just uninformed. And while Rockstar tends on the side of legal accuracy in their fight for first-amendment rights, they do so by pushing the envelope so far and so often that even when they produce a morally sound game, a bullet train of public opinion escapes their grasp. For gamers, defending their hobby often boils down to defending Rockstar, a task that is growing more tiring and difficult with each Grand Theft Auto release and every Bully misunderstanding perpetrated.

Perhaps Rockstar are the ones most ardently defending games' right to stand on their own merits. But we must consider how much work we put into defending them when they aren't willing to defend themselves, instead choosing a path that will lead to more publicity and higher profits. If games are to be taken seriously, we all need to be doing our part, not just leaving it in the hands of one game company and their coarse tactics.

So the next time you hear about a game that sounds just a little too bad to be true, remember this article. Pay attention, get involved, and stop letting Rockstar's silence do the talking for you.

Back To Top