Changes

==Controversy and criticism==

==Controversy and criticism==

Even before the game or its demo were released, in what only could be described as a fit of [[Liberal hysteria]], many left-wing individuals and groups were already criticizing the game on its alleged content.<ref name="bauman"/> The anti-Christian Right website Talk To Action sparked much of the criticism starting in May of 2006, several months before the game's release. Talk To Action contributor Jonathan Hutson wrote articles with titles like "the Purpose Driven Life Takers" condemning the game for allegedly having the goal "to convert or kill Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, gays, and anyone who advocates the separation of church and state - especially moderate, mainstream Christians."<ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/5/29/195855/959</ref> Hutson also asserted several times in other articles that "characters kill New Yorkers while shouting 'Praise the Lord.'"<ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/1/82458/92817</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/7/41835/37829</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/9/32014/83270</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/12/31011/1474</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/21/23153/9497</ref> (Strangely, at one point, Talk To Action apologized to Left Behind Games president Troy Lyndon in part for the adding of red coloring to screenshots of the game to give the false impression that it depicts blood.<ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/11/11/154225/46</ref>) Others picked up on Talk To Action's claims and uncritically repeated them and even built more falsehoods upon them. This included several left-wing bloggers, the [[BBC]]<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6178055.stm</ref>, the [[New York Times]]<ref>http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/grand-theft-christianity/</ref>, and the [[Nation (magazine)|Nation]]'s Max Blumenthal.<ref>http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?pid=220960</ref> The manufactured controversy and criticisms led to left-wing groups calling for [[Wal-Mart]] to censor the game by removing it from store shelves.<ref>http://www.faithfulamerica.org/article.php?id=133</ref><ref>http://ga3.org/campaign/tell_wal_mart</ref>

Even before the game or its demo were released, in what only could be described as a fit of [[Liberal hysteria]], many left-wing individuals and groups were already criticizing the game on its alleged content.<ref name="bauman"/> The anti-Christian Right website Talk To Action sparked much of the criticism starting in May of 2006, several months before the game's release. Talk To Action contributor Jonathan Hutson wrote articles with titles like "the Purpose Driven Life Takers" condemning the game for allegedly having the goal "to convert or kill Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, gays, and anyone who advocates the separation of church and state - especially moderate, mainstream Christians."<ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/5/29/195855/959</ref> Hutson also asserted several times in other articles that "characters kill New Yorkers while shouting 'Praise the Lord.'"<ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/1/82458/92817</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/7/41835/37829</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/9/32014/83270</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/12/31011/1474</ref><ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/6/21/23153/9497</ref> (Strangely, at one point, Talk To Action apologized to Left Behind Games president Troy Lyndon in part for the adding of red coloring to screenshots of the game to give the false impression that it depicts blood.<ref>http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/11/11/154225/46</ref>) Others picked up on Talk To Action's claims and uncritically repeated them and even built more falsehoods upon them. This included several left-wing bloggers, the [[BBC]]<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6178055.stm</ref>, the [[New York Times]]<ref>http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/grand-theft-christianity/</ref>, the San Francisco Chronicle<ref>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/12/12/MNG8TMU1KQ1.DTL</ref> and the [[Nation (magazine)|Nation]]'s Max Blumenthal.<ref>http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?pid=220960</ref> The manufactured controversy and criticisms led to left-wing groups calling for [[Wal-Mart]] to censor the game by removing it from store shelves.<ref>http://www.faithfulamerica.org/article.php?id=133</ref><ref>http://ga3.org/campaign/tell_wal_mart</ref>

Left Behind Games, however, vehemently denied these allegations and posted a response on their website<ref>http://www.leftbehindgames.com/pages/controversy.htm</ref> which cited the comments of various sources. Among them, the [[Anti-Defamation League]] - while criticizing the theology behind the game - stated, "Conversion to Christianity in the game is not depicted as forcible in nature, and violence is not rewarded in the game."<ref>http://www.adl.org/Interfaith/leftbehind.asp</ref> Game reviewers like IGN.com<ref>http://pc.ign.com/articles/745/745956p1.html</ref> and ArsTechnica.com<ref>http://arstechnica.com/reviews/games/leftbehind.ars</ref> also were cited as noting the false allegations of critics and the game's focus on promoting non-violent solutions to the missions. In addition to these sources cited by Left Behind Games, other sources noted the game's promotion of non-violence. [[GameSpy]] described the game as having an "[i]nteresting premise" and an "unusual 'nonviolent' strategic design," and stated, "[A]nyone looking for explicit 'Kill the unbelievers!'-style content to justify their fear of the game won't find it here."<ref>http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/left-behind-eternal-forces/749748p1.html</ref> Gamespot called the game an "[i]nteresting concept that strays from the kill-'em-all RTS norm."<ref>http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/leftbehindeternalforces/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=tabs&tag=tabs;reviews</ref> And G4's X-Play stated, "[A]ny deaths will severely negatively impact the spirit of your flock."<ref>http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/reviews/1367/Left_Behind_Eternal_Forces.html</ref>

Left Behind Games, however, vehemently denied these allegations and posted a response on their website<ref>http://www.leftbehindgames.com/pages/controversy.htm</ref> which cited the comments of various sources. Among them, the [[Anti-Defamation League]] - while criticizing the theology behind the game - stated, "Conversion to Christianity in the game is not depicted as forcible in nature, and violence is not rewarded in the game."<ref>http://www.adl.org/Interfaith/leftbehind.asp</ref> Game reviewers like IGN.com<ref>http://pc.ign.com/articles/745/745956p1.html</ref> and ArsTechnica.com<ref>http://arstechnica.com/reviews/games/leftbehind.ars</ref> also were cited as noting the false allegations of critics and the game's focus on promoting non-violent solutions to the missions. In addition to these sources cited by Left Behind Games, other sources noted the game's promotion of non-violence. [[GameSpy]] described the game as having an "[i]nteresting premise" and an "unusual 'nonviolent' strategic design," and stated, "[A]nyone looking for explicit 'Kill the unbelievers!'-style content to justify their fear of the game won't find it here."<ref>http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/left-behind-eternal-forces/749748p1.html</ref> Gamespot called the game an "[i]nteresting concept that strays from the kill-'em-all RTS norm."<ref>http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/leftbehindeternalforces/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=tabs&tag=tabs;reviews</ref> And G4's X-Play stated, "[A]ny deaths will severely negatively impact the spirit of your flock."<ref>http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/reviews/1367/Left_Behind_Eternal_Forces.html</ref>