This Halo 3 video about the Virginia Tech Massacre was made for educational purposes (it is a teenage student’s school project). Subjects such as these are always sensitive so if you are easily offended, you may want to pass on it. I personally am fascinated about the general subject of making serious videos from video games.
- Are videos made from the Halo 3 game engine (or any other video game engine) about subject matters like this offensive?
- Are videos like this a positive thing because it has the ability to touch a specific demographic?
- Do videos such as this one make light of extremely serious situations?
I would be interested in hearing your opinion after you view it (if you choose to). I personally think this video is well done, touching, and difficult to watch. How odd that a video made from Halo 3 has the ability to make a person feel this way.
Wow, that was impressive. I think it was handled tastefully enough to not be offensive.
I will not be watching this video.
I feel video games do cause violent behavior, and I certainly don’t need a violent video game showing me what I already know.
People cause violent behavior. do not be like cho who placed the blame of his murdering rampage on something other than himself.
Silvercube, you are wrong. Violent video games do not cause violent behavior. One might be influenced by them, I say might, since there are no evidences for it being true. It is the environment that determines how people react in different situations.
Are videos made from the Halo 3 game engine (or any other video game engine) about subject matters like this offensive?
I feel that’s too broad a question. It all depends on the particular subject and it’s relationship to the viewer. Someone could recreate storming the beach at Normandy in Halo 3 and I might find it exhilarating and clever and still touching, while if it was a recreation of 9/11 I would be quite disgusted. The shooting at VTech is just the right distance from me emotionally that I can view the video without feeling too put upon. It was well done technically, that’s for sure.
Are videos like this a positive thing because it has the ability to touch a specific demographic?
If it means teens will somehow ‘get’ that the massacre is meant to be treated seriously and not as some far-off event that can’t affect them - then sure, it has a positive. But my counter would be that we should be addressing *why* it takes something like this to get someone to understand what is going on around them. As a parent, sometimes I have to ‘trick’ or ‘fool’ my kids into understanding why something is serious. My hope is that they’ll eventually grow out of the need to be tricked. Certainly by the age of high school or college, I hope we’ll be on level ground when it comes to seeing the world around us. Mind you, I don’t expect us to be equal in how we *deal* with the world around us. Just that we at least can comprehend that the world around us… is the world around us! Sorry for speaking in circles.
Do videos such as this one make light of extremely serious situations?
Again it would depend on the situation.
Thank you for bringing the video to the attention of others. Hopefully it will generate some good discussion.
p.s. Just as a quick counter - I feel contrary to Silvercube’s position: in my opinion video games don’t cause violent behavior.
I’m not offended by it, but I do believe it is pointless. Why bring this up again? What possible education could be gleaned from this video? It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.
All it really does is recreate the shootings that happened, and someone who lost a loved one in that shooting will watch this and instant be reminded of it. In fact, because it portrays some of the events, one can’t help but imagine the poor souls in the place of the Spartans. Not exactly the kind of memories that need to be remembered.
If I was standing in front of the filmmaker who created this video, I’d probably turn my back to him.
Smurfa, YOU are correct. I for one am extremely outraged when people often use video games as a scapegoat when things happen to go wrong in society’s youth. Violence, acts of hate, shootings, all trying to be pinned on outlets that can be considered as promoting ‘violent behavior’. For example during the time of the Columbine shooting, everyone instantly thought they had put the greater puzzle together once it was discovered that the offenders had frequently played ‘Doom’. Not many people took the time to consider that the shooters had deeply-seeded mental problems, troubled backgrounds, and so on - it’s just far easier to go past the problems we have in our society which come from trouble at home, trouble at schools, trouble in neighborhoods, etc and to just point in the direction of ‘violent video games’.
Anyway, the video itself is a slightly touchy subject. Obviously it’s not meant to be offensive, just accurately put together; however anyone who doesn’t want to see it for any reason is completely justified in their own right. Angel has the right list of options up I think - ‘difficult to watch’ comes into mind for me. The reason it’s difficult to watch is that some people might clearly find this ‘distasteful’ simply because it’s hard to take something so serious when many of us play this game aggressively, or very humorously.
That was very touching. Personally, I believed that the video didn’t make fun of the massacre at all. It just told the “story” of the shootings. Job well done.
Haha, this is a pretty good topic for discussion Angel, as soon as I posted that I did I sat around and thought about it for a little more and I have to come back to it already.
I honestly can’t watch the video. Well, I can, but I don’t want to - not because it’s too hard for me to watch or anything like that..but that I know that I most likely wouldn’t be able to take its seriously. What I mean is that it says this video was made for “Educational Purposes”. I’m not sure that I entirely agree with that statement. If you DID want to make a video about the shootings for educational purpose, it would have been just as easy, if not easier, to have made the video with just a freeze-framed real life picture montage; like one of those documentary videos you might see on the History channel - a video just made up of true to life taken pictures about the incident, with a voice-over background or even just typed text while the pictures go across. That would’ve been easier than to have done all this through the Halo 3 engine.
I think this video was made to try and appeal to the question “How versatile is the usability of the Halo 3 engine” in terms of making very realistic videos. The maker(s) of this video had been sitting around and thinking (for at LEAST one time) “I wonder if we could recreate the Virginia Tech shooting through the Halo 3 engine? I wonder if it’s realistically possible?” The answer is obviously yes, otherwise we wouldn’t have anything to discuss right now.
I can’t really watch it just because it’s Halo - it’s not something I usually relate with ’seriousness’ in my head. I play Halo after a long days when I want to relax, enjoy time with friends and laugh, or just test my skills alone. Halo is something that for the most part, i relate directly with ‘Entertainment’ in my head, which, to me, is most likely the #1 reason that I just can’t bring myself to watch the video. The connections just can’t be made, or taken seriously in my mind. Does this hold true to anybody else?
that was good
Spelling and grammar mistakes aside, I see no reason to be offended by this particular vid. The addition of the Cho footage at the end highlights the absolute mental mess he was.
Sometimes it speaks too much of Big Brother, but somehow this individuals rights should have been compromised to prevent this. The Cho’s of the world need to be rounded up and defused before the unfortunate happens.
@ Smurfa: Don’t say I am wrong. Its just a matter of opinion.
I believe that Mr. Cho knew what he was doing because he had practice. Playing Counter Strike on his PC.
No normal person could possibly kill that many people professionally while having his heart rate below 30 bpm.
I’ve been researching this controversial topic over the last month for my college paper, and while you may think its a scapegoat. Its not. People’s mental status varies- thus there perception on reality can be different then what you or I may believe it is.
Parents need to learn to f*cking read the f*cking ratings on the damn video games, because I see parents buying games like Grand Theft Auto for their 8 year old kids.
So blame the parents for not keeping an eye out for their kid’s upbringing.
Thanks to companies like Rockstar, we have trash like Manhunt in stores. As if life was not miserable and psychotic enough.
Where is my Care Bears video game??????????
Nicely done, but were was mispelled as “where.” (I’m an editor, what can I say.)
-S-, I understand what you are saying. But since you are not easily offended, you should give the video a try and see if your theory holds correct. Will you be able to take it seriously even though you play this game recreationally? Will it impact you in some way even though it is made from a video game engine? You already have your opinion about how it will make you feel. I’d be interested in hearing if your opinion stands after watching it.
Silvercube, your opinion has no logic behind it when you state that Cho practiced on Counter Strike, since police found no such videogame or anything similar to Counter strike in his dorm room.
In fact the only video game he ever played was Sonic the Hedge Hog.
Maybe you should quit listening to idiots like Jack Thompson and look at the real issue… society as a whole.
@silvercube…
anyone who plays Counter-Strike to practice so they can kill their classmates is not normal to start out with. You are right that some violent video games are very much like simulations that the military uses to train people, Halo does not fall in this category due to lack of realism, but to say that playing Counter-Strike led to him deciding to go on a killing spree? It is the same with music, video games, movies or whatever. People just want to blame something other than their own failure as a parent, educator, mentor, friend, human being or whatever. Someone who commits an act like this does so from deep-rooted personal issues, one cannot say that a video game causes someone to become a murderer.
I do know a lot about weapons, and tactics from playing violent video games and watching movies, as do many many many people. Only an almost negligible percentage of these people ever commit a crime like this. To say that the game is the problem because of a couple instances? Why not point out that the statistics point to a conclusion that violent video games are not to blame for violent behavior based on the fact that nearly everyone who plays them does not go on to become homicidal.
Where you are right, and what is more disturbing, is that parents will let their kids watch and play these games at a young age. But then whose fault is it? Not the game but the parents. I think that games, movies and tv depicting violence can desensitize people to violence but I do not believe it inspires people to commit violent acts.
The problem with saying violent media leads to violent crime is that nearly everyone in America is exposed to violence either through games, movies or tv shows. So if everyone is seeing it, then there must be something else turning any one person into a murderer.
@bsangel
I would say that the appropro of making a video about the VT massacre using Halo depends on the video itself, I don’t think the medium is inappropriate in and of itself. A filmmaker uses what tools they have at their disposal, you can’t say that unless you have a major studio to front you a large budget then any film you make is by default inappropriate if it touches on a controversial topic.
Why is it odd that a Halo video can make a person feel this way? I don’t think it’s odd at all.
I thought that was really well done. I didn’t find it hard to take it seriously. Unfortunately, someone will see this and use it to advance their own agenda against violent games.
Regardless, companies are making army video games to help soldiers practice in their training.
@ The BS Police: Cho was playing this game in his high school days.
Yes, Jackson is a complete idiot, but he does have some good points.
Society and its values are degrading, and I for one am not happy about it at all.
That’s all I have to say on this subject matter.
Carry on ^_^
I agree with -S-. I mean I did watch it but most of the time I was thinking it was strange since almost all Halo videos are not serious. So it was a little strange for me to watch.
I don’t like it when video games are used this way because it just give politicians more ammo for their violent games create violent people campaign.
I could bareley whatch it, I was sort of transfixed with a strange sort of horror, even though it was just a Halo video, it was a video on something realy serious, I stopped whatching when the timer said 2:09, and I don’t ever want to whatch it again…
@Silvercube
Actually, they found no video games in Cho’s house. He didn’t even play violent video games. Please do some research before you speak.
Damnit, I accidentally posted before I had said that he played CS in high school, but not in college.
That hurt. I don’t think anyone can truly comment on this if they haven’t lived with the fear that someone they know could be dead in a violent manner like this.
The problem with violence in videogames is that there is no human connection. Cho had to look into the eyes of at least some of the people he killed. There was screaming-real screaming-loud and terrified. In videogame killing the senses are dulled. It makes killing easier.
When all of those people were killed it was a loss of life and a loss of innocence.
Should more have been done to protect the world from Cho? Should more have been done to protect Cho from himself? Absolutely.
The question is how do we do that without people losing their freedoms as human beings and Americans.
Am I offended? no
Do I think there is a point to making educational videos like this? no
I just cant wear the ODST helmet ever again…
Silvercube: “No normal person could possibly kill that many people professionally while having his heart rate below 30 bpm.”
I agree. In fact, I’d go so far as to say no normal person could possibly perform ANY action while having his heart rate below 30 bpm. Where did you pull THAT figure from, and is it complete BS?
PS: Lens flare FTW!
that was dumb
halo is supposed to be fun
virginia tech doesn’t need to be dramatized so that it wont be forgotten yet, let the Spielbergs of 20 years from now handle that
[...] Discovered this video by way of Hawty McBloggy [...]
Posted by:Silvercube
I will not be watching this video.
I feel video games do cause violent behavior, and I certainly don’t need a violent video game showing me what I already know.
Video Games don’t cause violent behaviour, and even if they do video games almost have nothing to do with that video they just used Halo 3 do basicly tell people what happened, and trust me video games didn’t make that guy insane.
Any way good job on the video.
[...] we truly can re-visit that disaster that was in very strange ways. h/t to Hawty McBloggy for this post. and the following video: (and yes, feel free not to watch it as it adds a surreality to what [...]
OK -
As per request of Angel, I have watched through the video entirely, and am still being met with a variety of mixed feelings. The video was obviously not made with the intentions of hurting/offending anyone, but it’s also easy to see why many people after seeing this can be left with a bad taste in their mouths.
Here’s why. The video was without question very creatively thought out and executed - who knew that such a serious event in the history of our society could be recreated through the mechanics of a video game engine? The thought had never even entered my mind that such a re-creation was possible. However, it’s a little hard to swallow. I said earlier the video was hard to take seriously because in my mind, I have a tough time making the mental connection that Halo does not equal Entertainment/enjoyment. I had to pause/restart the video after seeing the Red ODST round the corner, just to remind myself that this isn’t Red vs. Blue, this is a serious video about a very serious occurance. I guess the reason that so many people find this as difficult to watch is just because although it does have serious intentions - it’s not really using a serious method of being taken seriously. Meaning: it’s hard to take this video seriously, because watching a video game spartan shooting several other characters in a multiplayer game doesn’t come anywhere close to the senselessness, the tragedy, or the seriousness of the events that actually took place on that day. It burns me up inside even to see the real-life video footage of Cho that he personally sent to NBC. I don’t think the video is offensive…I just think that it UNINTENTIONALLY makes a certain light of the situation by recreating it through something that we all use for entertainment purposes. Case and point: if this was a recreation through a series of hand-drawings, I’m not sure anyone would be discussing it’s level of offensiveness.
Anyone else know where I’m coming from on this one?
Also on a totally unrelated note: the message at the end of the video saying this was for educational purposes and the like, that should be played BEFORE the Halo footage. Not to mention it would’ve been a little more helpful if the text explaining Cho’s actions had been played during the Halo footage, to keep the serious tone of the montage strong.
You have said what I have been struggling to say since I first watched the video. I wasn’t offended by the video so much as hurt by it. Like I said in my earlier comment-it totally dehumanizes the victims.
Silvercube wrote: Regardless, companies are making army video games to help soldiers practice in their training.
This fact casts video games in a favorable light. Simulations, virtual and otherwise, have been used for years to train people in extraordinary professions. NASA and the US Army are examples of prominent organizations who employ people in life-or-death, or otherwise extremely trying, situations. Since you mentioned soldiers, let’s focus on the Army specifically.
If a training method were found to cause dangerous and unpredictable behavior in people of sound mind, you can be certain that it would be discontinued at once. It is with great care that soldiers are fortified to survive. To this end, video games are used to help them learn to maintain control. The objective is not to visit death and chaos on the heads of innocents, but to complete the mission efficiently, with minimal direct contact with the enemy. There is nothing perverse, gratuitous or dangerous about interactive simulations that prepare soldiers to survive wartime scenarios. They are a tool to prevent the very thing you suggest they promote: wanton violence.
Pointing to vague coincidences (e.g., at some point in his life, Cho played Counter-Strike), drawing fanciful correlations (stating the Counter-Strike play is in some way related to his terrible crimes) and asserting personal beliefs without supporting evidence is no substitute for the extensive research and telling statistics about video games as a potential cause for violence, which point nearly unanimously to the conclusion that playing video games is not just an innocuous activity but in many ways a healthy one. This information is not difficult to find. Please don’t ignore it merely because you prefer a different conclusion.
wineymomma wrote: That hurt. I don’t think anyone can truly comment on this if they haven’t lived with the fear that someone they know could be dead in a violent manner like this.
With respect, one does not have to experience something firsthand to appreciate its seriousness or have an opinion about it. A victim of a traumatic event may have unique perspective, but it certainly doesn’t make their view on the matter the only valid one.
In videogame killing the senses are dulled. It makes killing easier.
But players of violent video game aren’t killing; they are engaging in an unsophisticated, inexact approximation of the act that bears little resemblance to the real thing. Pressing a button on a controller and watching digital avatars meet their pixelated doom is a far cry from picking up a gun, holding it to a whimpering and pleading human being, and pulling the trigger without remorse. It’s the difference between tossing a Nerf football back and forth with your friends in the yard and playing in the NFL. It’s the difference between buying a Barbie and giving birth to a child. The former activities may bear some minuscule passing resemblance to the latter, but only a truly delusional person would expect you to believe they produce identical experiences.
-S-, I agree with almost everything you say, but I want to expand on the point you made about the drawings. If a professional artist created a gallery of scenes from that day, I’m sure there would be less discussion about the drawings’ offensiveness (I’m less inclined to agree with you that _nobody_ would be offended).
But what if you can only draw stick figures or cartoons? I’d be willing to go out on a limb and say that no matter how seriously you treat the project, cartoon depictions of the victims, and killer for that matter, are just plain hard to take seriously.
For the same reason, United 93 received (and deserved) almost universal praise, even though it was portraying something very emotionally volatile. Re-enactments can be deeply moving, but they require the utmost level of care and authenticity. If United 93 had used cheap wooden sets and B-movie quality actors, it would have been a slap in the face.
Now, the student who made this project may not be a professional artist, and almost certainly doesn’t have access to a Hollywood budget. But still, making due with what you have isn’t always the best choice. It isn’t necessary to re-enact the events of the day if your only options for doing so would cheapen them. Don’t draw cartoons, don’t act it out with your buddies and some cap guns, and don’t make a machinima video out of it.
That being said, the second half of the video (the part that uses real footage of the shooter) was the part that got a reaction out of me. But can you imagine if he had dubbed Cho’s voice over a Spartan bobbing his head up and down instead?
I agree with what -S- pointed out. It’s a not so serious method of displaying something that was very serious. I don’t think it captured the horror of what happened, and it seems to trivialize the massacre. I could see the engine itself being used for demonstration purposes, but I think this was an inappropriate and pointless example.
To me, it almost takes all the feeling out of the event. It’s a scary, disturbing event, but this video makes it feel like it’s equating it to just another multiplayer deathmatch.
I think things like this do not belong in machinima. It’s my personal opinion that a video like this would be more suited to the real world-the game animations just don’t belong in a video like this.
I’m all for serious moviemaking in Halo….but there hasn’t been a game yet where I would say “a video like this could be done.” It’s borderline inappropriate at best. Interesting video…but not appropriate.
I get it but I dont think we n eed to see this again.
I think I may have come off as anti-gaming. Really I’m not. I don’t believe video gaming causes people to do terrible things. I don’t believe guns kill people.
FuzzyWhisper wrote: But players of violent video game aren’t killing; they are engaging in an unsophisticated, inexact approximation of the act that bears little resemblance to the real thing.
I do believe that the more often people indulge in any approximation of the kind of violence in video gaming that it only magnifies tendencies already part of their personalities.
I don’t believe that everyone has these tendencies nor do I believe in censorship of any kind.
When I wrote that video games dull the senses to killing I was referring to the fact that killing in video games dehumanizes the victim and in the case of the VT massacre (0r any other real life situation) it is not appropriate.
I had chills watching this video.
1.Are videos made from the Halo 3 game engine (or any other video game engine) about subject matters like this offensive?
Movies are made about all subject matter-if you find that offensive, then you will find this offensive. Some movies in my mind are unneccesary when re inacting certain events-
2.Are videos like this a positive thing because it has the ability to touch a specific demographic?
This particular “movie” didnt’ seem to have a point to me. I wasn’t sure what the “message” was. In my opinion it seemed a strong emphasis on the murderer and not the victims. I would have to go to the youtube page to see if there is any more background about it.
3.Do videos such as this one make light of extremely serious situations?
Again, with this particular video-I’m not sure what the exact message was, except to tell about the events, I am curious about the “film maker” and what they were wanting to accomplish. There was time and effort put into that.
Violent video games do not “cause” violent behaviour-violent behaviuor has been around long before video games were created. What do they have to “blame” it on?
If i offended anyone i am sorry. It was just meant for my class and to get a good grade. I appreicate the comments on saying this was “tasteful”. This project was done out of interest and not hate.
Thanks for your comments and visit http://trocitystudios.com/ for more videos like this.
I find a Halo powered “re-enactment” of the VT tragedy an odd choice for a school project; however I didn’t find it offensive. I don’t know if I would call it tasteful, but it was at least clear that it wasn’t intended to make light of that terrible event.
@Silvercube: This may be beating a dead horse (I haven’t taken the time to read each and every comment), but while you’re entitled to your own opinion about video games causing violent behavior, I feel your opinion is based upon misinformation.
What kind of research have you been doing and where have you gotten your information? I did an extensive research project on the effect of violent video games on high school students in 2001 – a couple years after the Columbine attack. The media was quick to blame video games, movies, and heavy metal music.
My results painted a very different picture. I found that students who played a healthy amount (healthy being a few hours a week) of “violent” video games (shooters, adventures, etc.) were LESS likely to act aggressively toward others. What I did find however was that students displayed more aggressive behavior while PLAYING a violent game.
Similar results have been found in studies concerning aggressive behavior in children and adolescents involved in team sports.
To put it simply, playing a violent video game is a healthy and safe aggressive release - much in the same way that playing a competitive team sport is.
It is popular for the media to choose a target when something tragic happens without a clear explanation. They jump at shadows in an attempt to explain something that just isn’t explainable. The only part of this routine that is new is video games being blamed.
The Columbine massacre, the VT massacre, and countless other school shootings were terrible tragedies executed by very disturbed individuals. Halo and Counter Strike didn’t make them that way.
it seems a bit poitnless, really. if anything it’s kinda harmful as far as that the killer was desperate to make himself a media martyr otherwise he wouldn’t have made such a show of it all. this video just feeds the ethereal ego the killer left us with.
HERES THE TRUTH ABOUT THE VIDEO BECAUSE I HELP MAKE IT!!
the video was in no regards to offend any one it was a school project.
if your saying fighting video games makes the person violent your WRONG! scientist prove its impossible to be hipmotised to kill people by a 2d or 3d game… and on that note CS (aka Counter strike) or any other pc shoot em up game does not teach you shit about killing please tell me ..do they have a gun that has a mouse and left click…. NO so how would it teach you, weapons training Honestly lets think logic people..!
http://www.trocitystudios.com hit us up there and register to share your regards about this so called “offensive” video with the clan that way you can hear the real truth of the story.
(ignore spelling)
Ok listen, I think that this is a good way to get what happened out there to a more diverse croud of people (halo players / xbox players etc.)
Also, Counter-strike? you can’t be serious…I’ve handled real guns before, as well as most other people, and the people who have know the differance between reality and pretend, video games where meant to simulate things that we can’t/can do in real life by just pressing buttons.
If you wan’t to blame violence on video games i don’t think anyone wants to hear it, because JUST LOOK! The person who made this did the complete oposite and used a game for educational purposes rather than shooting and violence!
Okay. People that think this is useless need to try to making something useful themselves and see if they can do any better. I highly doubt you can.
Can it not be stressed enough? EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. IN CAPITAL LETTERS. Shall I go by syllables?
Why would someone make a video like this and say “haha look what happened.”???
Get real people, and quit being ignorant.
Video Games in general are called “enternainment.” Not “weapon training mechanisms.” The world is filled with violence and some people decide to blame it on a Video game?
I’m disgusted by these comments.
Who is to say what a video game will do. Do you blame 9/11 on flight simulation games? Do you blame WWII on Call of Duty? Of course not. It was my god given right to make this video and i did. I would like to thank bs angel for post this blog and i would like to thank all my buddies at trocitystudios.com for helping me out with this project. I made a 96 on this project and im proud to call it my own. If you are not a gamer, you have no right to say that video games can cause violence. Hollywood top movies would provoke more violence than anything.
If a video game could make u commit violent acts then movies and books could to so any1 who says tht video games make you commit violent acts its not your opinion you are truly wrong because you dont see ppl going to kill ppl after watching a murder movie or reading a book about murder.
I’m just wondering how someone could be so desperate to say video games are violent by bringing up stuff that isnt even true, especialy on a subject like this, I mean it was used for educational purposes, it clearly says it on the vid, and yet somehow people try to blame it on video games!
Hi. I read through some of the posts here. I read about the video but didn’t watch it because I’m squeamish about such things
Halo is a good tool for something like a machinima movie because of the flexibility of the characters and camera. Basically, if you dont’ have a camera, or actors, or locales, but you still want to tell a story, you have these little animated people that you can control to do it. A little editing and voila. It has nothing to do with what Halo is, except that guns were involved in real life and this game has already taken that obstacle away from the director since the characters have guns.
No, Cho didn’t play video games. Glad that was pointed out.
And if he did, so what? Screwed up people are attracted to media that meshes with their twisted mindset. But there has been NO proof that the games CAUSE it. If you find some guy who committed a crime like this and found out he played Manhunt, you’d probably also find Korn in his CD collection and Saw I, II and III in his DVD library. He is attracted to the media. The media didn’t create him.
Lastly, it is ludicrous to think that one could practice for something like this with a video game. I can’t race professionally because I’m good at PGR. I don’t kick ass at football because I’m good at Madden. I won’t be a good soldier because I rock at Call of Duty 4. The Army uses games as a tool, but they do so more for decision making than weapon control. Gun’s aren’t controlled with dual analog sticks. Being good at one does not make you automatically good with the other.
What a game MIGHT do is improve your respoonse time and hand/eye coordination. And while a criminal might use that to his advantage, so might a doctor. It’s not what’s in the game. It’s what the player takes away from the game.
Is it screwed up to say, “I watched Saving Private Ryan and enjoyed it?” Or “Schindler’s List?” It depends on what you took away from the movies. Maybe you got the part about risking your own life for others. Maybe you got to see a lot of carnage and misery.
Halo addresses religious fanatics, prejudice, cooperation, hope, trust, honor… on the other hand, you get to shoot a lot of stuff. What do you take away from it?
Oh, and one more thing. Cho wasn’t a kid so ratings meant nothing. They are completely irrelevant to his situation, even if he had been a gamer.
[...] invite my readers to offer up what their take is on this particular film. There are already some interesting dialogs taking place in the blogosphere about it, but I thought it important to get a sense of what many of [...]
[...] more recent to take a look at is the Virginia Tech Massacre video, done in Halo 3, sort of re-enacting Virginia Tech with as much delicacy as possible while trying [...]
I’m very interested in finding out exactly what grade the filmmaker was in. Would hand-drawn montage have been better if the filmmaker can’t draw well? And would the teachers allow it? If it was too “real”, it would be inappropriate for school, right? Personally, I think stick-figure massacre would have been more insulting than video game people. After all, perhaps we should be thinking that the video game engine gave a very powerful creative tool to someone who otherwise would have not been able to express his view of it. And that the “dehumanization” that many found offensive is probably what made it acceptable to show in school (no blood, no horrified looks on faces). Everything that makes it offensive to adults makes it acceptable to adults to allow children to see. Kind of a double standard.
All of us who don’t spend all day in schools need to remember that this, and the other school shootings, are things students have to live with every day.
Just think of all the kids who look at the “weird” kid and wonder if he’s going to kill them. I’d say showing who Cho actually was one of the best things about this video - which certainly would have been a lot more questionable for presentation in school if a “picture montage” of real people had preceded it.
It’s like asking why someone would want to make a video about domestic violence… just because it’s not a part of your world doesn’t mean it’s not something that affects other people.
Finally, I would argue that saying Cho should have been “stopped” is true, but SHOULD is different than could have. What “they” should/could have stopped him? Armed guards at the school? Other students who also carried weapons? The police years before because someone determined him to be mentally ill? And what should have happened to him if the police did act on that teacher’s concerns? Court mandated therapy? Institutionalization? Would either of those have ensured a massacre was prevented? maybe… but are there things that just have to happen in order to change how society thinks? would there have been a shooting at a different school if this one hadn’t happened?
Anyway. Just my thoughts.
This video is saying what happen…..in real life …i think we cant say video games are dangerous ways to be agressive…..thats why there is some ages to play…..more agressive than that “movies”….blood everywhere and are must more real than games.
how is name song????