Left Behind Games Threatens Sites That Don't Like Left Behind Games

Left Behind Games, producer of the biblically-apocalyptic Left Behind: Eternal Forces, has issued threatening letters to blogs and websites that have criticized the company's real-time strategy game.

According to a report on GamePolitics, sites including Gameology, Daily Kos and the Public Theologian have received the letter, which insists the sites remove "false and misleading" comments or face legal repercussions. Daily Kos claims that at least one blogger has removed Eternal Forces-related content in order to dodge the threat, but many others have chosen instead to make the intimidation tactic public.

The letter, issued by the law offices of Gordon D. Katz, says that while Left Behind Games "generally supports free speech in the media," it will not tolerate the spread of false information that may cause harm to the company. "Left Behind Games Inc. is demanding that you immediately remove any and all information contained on your site about the above stated game that is false and/or misleading, including any such statements or commentary and the responses thereto," the letter says. "This includes posted comments made by others in the context of reading the incorrect or misleading statements."

"If you do not comply immediately, the company will be forced to pursue additional legal action which will include claims for damages, costs of suit and attorney's fees," it continues. "This may subject you and your organization to significant legal and financial damages."

Oddly, the letter does not specify what "false and misleading" information the company wishes removed. It does, however, invite recipients of the letter to call the lawyer's Administrator, Robilyn Lyndon, executive vice-president of Left Behind Games and wife of Left Behind Games CEO Troy Lyndon, which also makes her the client.

Released in 2006, Left Behind: Eternal Forces has faced criticism both from Christian groups, who decried the game's intolerance and "convert or die" philosophy, and from game reviewers, the majority of whom slapped the game with average-to-poor reviews over its technical issues (most of which have since been patched) and mediocre gameplay.

Permalink

Good to know they "generally support free speech."

And people say fundamentalists are irrational. I hate to accuse people who obviously are far more well versed in the scripture than I am with ignoring central tenets, etc., but I was raised Southern Baptist, and I seem to recall something about "tolerance" being fairly important in the teachings of Christ. Oddly, the actual practice of Christianity rarely incorporates this nuance.

I'd like to know what exactly it is they find so false and misleading. There seems to be a reasonable consensus that the game was offensive and/or shitty, so what exactly do they want people to say (or not say, as the case may be) about it?

"I'd like to know what exactly it is they find so false and misleading."

I remember the first time I head about the game. It was on a blog (perhaps the one that took down the Eternal Forces-related content in order to dodge the threat) that had taken screenshots of the game and photoshopped them to add blood and gore. Later, the blog author was called on the photoshop job, and gave a half-hearted attempt to justify it by saying that the actual screenshots didn't depict the offensive nature of the game well enough.

What he really meant, of course, was that the screenshots did not depict the nature of the game offensively enough.

I would not be surprised if this was the target of the letter. The screenshots were false and misleading in exactly the sort of way that would hurt sales.

I'm not defending the merits of the game, mind you, but I also don't defend false accusations. There are plenty of truthful ways to criticize the game.

Egads. First the game is based upon a series of books that are only enjoyable to the most vile and hate-filled Christians who think anyone that disagrees with them should suffer the most horrible of fates, and then they go so far as to demand this sort of thing. Even if it's in the case Patriarch917 noted, that's unreasonable. Part of the Internet is parody and false information. You can't expect people to portray your game precisely as you want it.

I just can't stand this company.

Was the shopping an intentional effort to deceive, or was it a "stick Jack's head on Master Chief's body" kind of thing?

It's their failure to clarify what they consider to be false or misleading that's the problem. I mean, if someone is just saying the AI is crap, the controls are tankish, etc., those are matters of opinion and cannot be considered false. Obvious satire or parody as well cannot be considered false or misleading.

But the blanket threat with no clarification can only be called an attempt to intimidate sites into doing what some have already done---remove the content entirely.