The most positive reviews of "Super Columbine Massacre" came from critics who accepted Ledonne's intended message. "Wired" magazine writer Clive Thompson appreciated the game's attention to narrative detail, writing that "the upshot the game is that Ledonne has done a surprisingly good job of painting the emotional landscape of gunmen—whipsawing from self-pity to pompous grandiosity and blinding rage, then back again." Thompson called the game subtle, including jabs at the participants and gaming culture by using the language of games as a way to think about the killings. Writing for "The Courier Mail", Paul Syvret's advice to those who found the game controversial and in bad taste was to "lighten up". Bogost summed up his review of the game by writing "this game is not fun, it is challenging, and difficult to play—not technically difficult, but conceptually difficult. We need more of that." David Kociemba, a professor at Emerson College, agreed with Bogost and commented that "the controversy should be that there aren't more games like "Super Columbine Massacre RPG!" that are as demanding and as artistically innovative." Dugan responded to common criticisms of the game, including that the game was made in bad taste, by writing a rebuttal on his blog: