Extra Punctuation: What Is the Matter with You People?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

CopperBoom:
What about "Skyrim Sex Life"
which is just about killing women and artfully placing them because you cannot have as many wives as he wants?

http://kotaku.com/5863096/a-peek-inside-the-home-of-skyrims-first-serial-killer

This piece reminds me of that.

What, don't tell me you've never decorated your virtual home with corpses?

I thought everyone did that. :O

BlackStar42:
Mayor MacReady (sp?) in Little Lamplight, Fallout 3. THAT is the reason why I should be able to kill the gobby little shits. Or at least have non-lethal ways to shut them up (and no, the mute button doesn't count).

After reading this column, I tried to remember why I was pro child killing in video games in the first place and now I do. I don't want kids to have to die in games, but if you do make them immortal, then don't make them the most annoying and arrogant people in the game. Because then you get the feeling that the only reason that they are like that is because you can't "change their attitude". It's deliberately bating you in front of your cage, is what it is.

Why are children exempt from all the dirty atrocities, which when committed on adults are deemed somewhat acceptable? I can understand the argument that the developer did not put rape children option for children for personal moral, or PR reasons, but I don't understand the argument against these things for being modded into the game. Hell, if a game lets us rape an adult human NPC, then I don't see a problem with modders adding a "rape the goat" option in the game.

Nothing should be off limits in a game, especially when it comes to content offered by non-developer parties.

Sorry, Yahtzee, I don't say this often, but your argument is severely flawed.

SirBryghtside:
Interesting aside - should a child player be able to kill children in Skyrim?

What do you mean "child player"? The entire game is rated "M". Children shouldn't even be allow to play the damn thing, but, if they are being allowed to play the game, and they are being treated like adults, then they can make the adult choices in the game as well.

seraphy:
How about not putting children in games at all, if you can't handle them dying in a virtual world.

Would be better option than making them immortal.

I agree.

I much prefer the GTA method of kids not existing vs. immortal children.

Giest4life:

SirBryghtside:
Interesting aside - should a child player be able to kill children in Skyrim?

What do you mean "child player"? The entire game is rated "M". Children shouldn't even be allow to play the damn thing, but, if they are being allowed to play the game, and they are being treated like adults, then they can make the adult choices in the game as well.

I think he means a child that you play as.

Children should only be killed if it actually serves a purpose to the story. Like if you choose to loot a dungeon instead of saving the orphanage-kids die. Or if you're in a firefight and some kid runs into the crossfire. Or if you hear a noise in a darkened room and chuck a grenade in, but it was just a little kid scared of you. But you shouldn't be able to just just waltz up to a kid and start hacking away. Hell, make the player character refuse to do it, like I imagine alot of gamers would in real life. This is realistic enough. To use Yatzhee's analogy, you wouldn't want to fuck a little kid, but if one was running around in an orgy, that's the parent's fault.

I think more games, but specifically FarCry2, should have had child soldiers. It's perfectly justifiable to kill anybody if they're trying to kill you, and it would be nice to see child killers get fucked up by the quarry every once in a while. It's not like these things don't already happen in real life.

I actually like invincible children , that means i can put loads of bullets into them and they keep coming back for more ! Like in fall Out 3.

Although if they weren't annoying i wouldn't want to kill them.

Farther than stars:

BlackStar42:
Mayor MacReady (sp?) in Little Lamplight, Fallout 3. THAT is the reason why I should be able to kill the gobby little shits. Or at least have non-lethal ways to shut them up (and no, the mute button doesn't count).

After reading this column, I tried to remember why I was pro child killing in video games in the first place and now I do. I don't want kids to have to die in games, but if you do make them immortal, then don't make them the most annoying and arrogant people in the game. Because then you get the feeling that the only reason that they are like that is because you can't "change their attitude". It's deliberately bating you in front of your cage, is what it is.

I kinda liked MacReady. Princess was the one I wanted to disembowel with a railroad spike.

Yahtzee's just using social taboos in an attempt to make the evil 'child haters' feel bad. It's a petty and childish move. He goes on and on about child murder, but he completely fails to mention how plenty of people blindly murder adult innocents in Skyrim, people who are just minding their own business. Is murdering innocents some acceptable level of bad but murdering children is not? I wasn't aware that morality was age-dependent. He's strawmanning the modders like mad. Of course the majority of people who agree with him will act in the same way, thumbing down their noses and acting morally superior. Tis expected.

From the bit of Skyrim I was able to recently play, I can say that most of the modders are doing it exactly for the reason he dismisses: immersion. A buddy of mine went to a village where the whole town had been wiped out, but the children. And they just casually wandered around town, oblivious to their dead mothers, fathers, etc. It's just a massively confusing contrast that's more hilarious then depressing. However, with a mod, you would go into the town, see the dead (including the children) and become angry. Basically, rather then having an immersion-breaking response, you'd have an emotional one. And I fail to see the problem with that.

Of course, there's also some people who have modded it just because Bethesda seems to make their children characters as obnoxious as they can. And after the 'AssholeVille' that was most of Little Lamplight I can kind of understand.

Love how the counterarguement to Yahtzee's point is "ET RUINZ MAH IMMERSHUN!"

Let me reiterate-

"What the fuck is wrong with you people!?"

Dastardly:

(As for the killing of kids, I think an acceptable compromise would be to link each child to an adult NPC. If the adult is killed, the child simply fades out. This way, the "whole village" is killed, but there is no need to depict dead kids -- what, are you going to loot them? -- and no need to empower the player to kill them.)

The best solution I can think of.

But I gotta agree, for a race of such badass's you'd expect the Nords to be all about the respect and discipline- instead their kids are spoilt mouthy brats.

As many have said, watching a dragon roast a family only for the child to walk away from their parents burning body like nothing happened is a massive immersion breaker. And the amount of meta in the children's dialog is painful, you can't tell me they don't realise they have complete immortality with the way they talk to the player character.

I have no desire to just randomly chop up kids (or normal villagers). I even played hide and seek. But as my stealthy thief character, I strongly dislike immortal little snitches. Witnesses must go.

If they have the same logic as animals (the bugged chicken aside) then it'd be fine that they're untouchable. But untouchable little mobile alarmbots is the worst of both.

That doesn't make sense.

If it's all about the tone of the game and the restrictions that enforce that tone, why would Skyrim allow the player to murder entire villages worth of innocents? How does putting an arrow through the throat of every farmer you see match the whole adventurer thing any more than methodically killing kids?

I still call bullshit to all those ''immersion'' people. Strange how not being able to kill kids bothers you so damn much while floating over a fence is a-ok.

For me it's very simple : no immortal beings. If it isn't supposed to be killed then it shouldn't be there at all. However i'm an old fart and i know the difference between real life and game and no amount of hyperrealisic gore will ever change it.

BTW : Some time ago i went for a little trip to Egypt and was surprised to find very small amount of women. In some cities they were almost completely absent. Since then i'm completely ok with lack of some obvious elements in videogames. :)

"Anyway, everyone knows children never die in fantasy stories, even if everyone else in the village does. 'Cos then the child is expected to go off and train for fifteen years until they're built like a bullock barbecue and can take revenge on the dark lord who orchestrated it all. It's pretty much the law."

Roses are red
violets are blue
in Soviet Russia
your father avenges you

;)

I think I get why people want to kill children in games like Skyrim, Fallout and to a lesser extent GTA.

Because those games give you freedom and let you be evil.

Not morally ambiguous, or any shade of grey but unquestionably irredeemably evil.

You can go about your merry way and kill people that you see for no reason.

In GTA you can shoot old ladies, in Fallout you can blow a father's head off right in front of his daughter, and you can nuke an entire city. In both games you can rob people or beat random people to death with your bare hands or in GTA's case with a baseball bat or a dildo.

As for Skyrim ... I haven't actually played the game but the point is it lets you play as a serial killer in a sandbox, there's nothing morally ambiguous about that. So your whole thing about it not fitting the rest of the game makes no sense. I mean once you've slaughtered your 200th innocent adult, your evilness has plateaued in a way that adding kids to the list won't move.

To put it another way:

Skyrim lets you be evil so you go about your merry way.

Yay! Rob, Kill, Slaughter, betray, burn (I assume there's some way to light people on fire in the game), slaughter, slaughter, slaughter, genocide, murder 5 whole villages of adults leaving the kids to fend for themselves.

What? You can't kill children, that's too evil.

Dude, there is a slight difference between depicting the murder and the sexual intercourse with a child, the latter being illegal in most jurisdictions.

I always pictured you as some kind of a bitter misantrophist who expresses his anger and disappointment through video reviews and now this stupid reasoning in favor of kids being immortal. Are you actually nice?

BTW: Kill their parents, that'll give them what they deserve. IMO Bethesda should bind their existance to their parents state: Parents dead->remove children. Or they could have implemented some kind of a "fading away when dead" thing instead of an actual death animation.

q_tf:
Dude, there is a slight difference between depicting the murder and the sexual intercourse with a child, the latter being illegal in most jurisdictions.

Both of those are illegal in most jurisdictions.

Father Time:

Skyrim lets you be evil so you go about your merry way.

Yay! Rob, Kill, Slaughter, betray, burn (I assume there's some way to light people on fire in the game), slaughter, slaughter, slaughter, genocide, murder some more.

What? You can't kill children, that's too evil.

Tis not a bad point. I was playing through Fallout 3 as basically a cannibalistic mass murdering zombie Confederate psychopath in a stealth suit (yes it was silly as hell). I had basically ripped my way across the Wasteland, selling people I didn't like into slavery, wiping out entire towns because their goods were overpriced, killing Three Dog because he said mean things about me on the radio, etc. Then I get to Little Lamplight. The extent of my evil there was making a little girl cry and just kind of responding rudely to people's questions. Yeah, weird contrast.

Monoochrom:
I still call bullshit to all those ''immersion'' people. Strange how not being able to kill kids bothers you so damn much while floating over a fence is a-ok.

That's a shitty argument.

Glitches are things everyone expects to be removed (within reason), and things that the developer tries to get rid of.

That's why video games get patches, that's why the larger studios hire full time testers.

"And then I read the news story that modders have put child murdering back into Skyrim."

This should be called "allowing for Skyrim children to die," because that's the overall purpose. Alright, murdering them might be the main specific, but once a town's had a dragon fuck the ever-loving shit out of it, it is a little bizarre to see Little Timmy survive.

MW3's is pointless and lazy, simply allowing it in Skyrim is not really the same thing. If people are going to take issue with the latter, then don't play the games at all, because you won't be able to handle the fact that people will slit a hobo's throat for a carrot.

"The designers of Skyrim are trying to create a setting in which you forge an epic fantasy story. And whether your story is one of a fine upstanding swordsman, or a neutral mercenary, or a morally flexible assassin-thief, pausing on your way to work to methodically slice your way through a row of innocent schoolchildren is going to turn that story into something it doesn't want to be."

And yet you can spend 10s of hours picking flowers and making potions that let you sprint for longer. Hardly an epic, yet still an option.

The designers of Skyrim set out to create a world in which you can do whatever the hell you want; they don't let kids die because its deemed to be in poor taste because... well, because.

DVS BSTrD:
Funny enough I seem to remember you complaining about NOT being able to kill children in a game yourself Mr Crowshaw. Fable 2 i think it was, Saying something about "So much for total freedom ey?" "Suddenly we're getting off-message" I don't think it so much that children are the only ones you can't kill, but more that children are the only ones who can't die. If I can kill everything else and everything else can kill everything else, why do the kids get a free pass? And I doubt people would mind so such but it seems that the kids have become aware of their invulnerably in almost every game they are in and won't stop taunting the player about it.

But you won't be happy until someone makes a mod that allows you marry Barbas will you?

To be fair, Fable has always bragged about it's freedom of choice and blah, blah, blah. I think it was more a case of Yahtzee ragging on all the Molyneux Hype Speak.

Speaking of Fable, I remember a whole bunch of people were bitching about the dog dying in Fable 2 to the point that Lionhead had to add a DLC patch where you could bring the stupid mutt back. Now we have Skyrim and we're getting "invincible children ruins my immersion".

I guess my question is, would someone make a patch to make killing dogs okay?

Maybe I've just grown to hate children due to constant exposure to morons on Xbox Live, but whenever I see a sarcastic, annoying child in Skyrim, my blood boils, I see red, I taste blood, and I imagine him tea-bagging my corpse.

If nothing else, I'd like to at least dangling him off a cliff or throw him in a monster-infested cave.

Concerning MW3... yeah, the series has devolved from "substance" to "shlock", and I don't think money-grubbing Kotick minds or dimwitted, hype-buying fans of the series care. They could release a COD game at this point that is nothing but shooting defenseless women and minorities and it would STILL sell a ton more than most other deserving games.

Eternal_Lament:
we were watching a movie where they basically built up this scene where a baby in a carriage would fall down a flight of stairs and die, but in the end is miracously saved by this guy who just killed 3 people in that area (he was a hitman) in a way that could only be explained as "Cliche Heroic Moment".

Was it "Battleship Potemkin"? It's a Russian movie from 1925 that only pretentious people still like or force into education because they refuse to let go of their misinformed interpretations of what that scene really meant. (Some of the theories are just crazy)

Anyway, as you can see under, before that scene even happens (the baby scene) another actual kid gets shot. In the back.

The simple explanation is this: in 1925, people were simpler-in-the-brain and this was how you shocked people back then, and was considered "hip" and "edgy". That's all their is to it. All forms of media will have elements capitalizing on the shock&awe bullshit, in 1925, in 2011 just as in the last days of mother earth comes along to snuff out this horrible race of creatures called humans.

Blind Sight:

Father Time:

Skyrim lets you be evil so you go about your merry way.

Yay! Rob, Kill, Slaughter, betray, burn (I assume there's some way to light people on fire in the game), slaughter, slaughter, slaughter, genocide, murder some more.

What? You can't kill children, that's too evil.

Tis not a bad point. I was playing through Fallout 3 as basically a cannibalistic mass murdering zombie Confederate psychopath in a stealth suit (yes it was silly as hell). I had basically ripped my way across the Wasteland, selling people I didn't like into slavery, wiping out entire towns because their goods were overpriced, killing Three Dog because he said mean things about me on the radio, etc. Then I get to Little Lamplight. The extent of my evil there was making a little girl cry and just kind of responding rudely to people's questions. Yeah, weird contrast.

Indeed, BTW I had no idea you could kill 3 Dog, now I just want to find the guy and talk to him.

I think it would be messed up if people demanded you be able to kill random kids in a game like L.A. Noire, or any other game where you only play as a good guy.

That the way You want to go, Yahtzee? Seriously? I thought better of You. Oh well. Everyday something new.

I assume next time You read an article somewhere about how all games featuring killing are bad "because there are some lines You just don't cross", You'll just nod in agreement.

As for Your recontextualization: Yes, I would actually like to have that option (except that for Your example to be valid, You'd actually have to be able to rape adults, not just engage in consentual sex with them). In a game like Skyrim, I want consistency, and I want freedom. That also includes the freedom NOT to do things even if You can. We don't get (too many) immortal "good guys" because "killing is wrong, but killing innocent people especially so". They didn't disallow stealing from poor people because "stealing is wrong, but stealing form the poor especially so".

If you draw an arbitrary line there, fine, but at least don't moan that others draw an arbitrary line somewhere else, and You're only fine with it because You already crossed it.

Father Time:

q_tf:
Dude, there is a slight difference between depicting the murder and the sexual intercourse with a child, the latter being illegal in most jurisdictions.

Both of those are illegal in most jurisdictions.

I do believe he meant the depiction of sexual intercourse with children being illegal as opposed to the depiction of murder. But yeah, bad wording made it kinda hillarious.

~Sylv

I don't think the point is "killing children". One of the appeals of open world games is that you can do so much stuff and the "realism" that is associated with that. Even if you don't intend to kill kids, knowing that you could, because the game allows you to is part of that enjoyment. Also, if you cast a huge fireball in a city to notice that everyone, except the children was killed, is kind of a bummer in the context of portraying that open-world realism. And I agree with that sentiment.

I don't want to kill kids in videogames, but if a dragon sweeps down and incenirates some travelling folk, I don't want the kids to miraculously defy the laws of the (game) universe, become fireproof and survive.

Father Time:

Blind Sight:

Father Time:

Skyrim lets you be evil so you go about your merry way.

Yay! Rob, Kill, Slaughter, betray, burn (I assume there's some way to light people on fire in the game), slaughter, slaughter, slaughter, genocide, murder some more.

What? You can't kill children, that's too evil.

Tis not a bad point. I was playing through Fallout 3 as basically a cannibalistic mass murdering zombie Confederate psychopath in a stealth suit (yes it was silly as hell). I had basically ripped my way across the Wasteland, selling people I didn't like into slavery, wiping out entire towns because their goods were overpriced, killing Three Dog because he said mean things about me on the radio, etc. Then I get to Little Lamplight. The extent of my evil there was making a little girl cry and just kind of responding rudely to people's questions. Yeah, weird contrast.

Indeed, BTW I had no idea you could kill 3 Dog, now I just want to find the guy and talk to him.

I think it would be messed up if people demanded you kill kids in a game like L.A. Noire or any other game where you only play as a good guy.

Yeah I can definitely understand how contextualizing the 'evil' is necessary. It's actually funny when you kill Three Dog, because then his assistant takes over the station and just randomly mentions how 'some asshole killed our DJ'.

Father Time:

q_tf:
Dude, there is a slight difference between depicting the murder and the sexual intercourse with a child, the latter being illegal in most jurisdictions.

Both of those are illegal in most jurisdictions.

Wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide#In_fiction_and_culture

Child pornography is - no matter if real or animated - illegal.

Monoochrom:

Father Time:

Monoochrom:
I still call bullshit to all those ''immersion'' people. Strange how not being able to kill kids bothers you so damn much while floating over a fence is a-ok.

That's a shitty argument.

Glitches are things everyone expects to be removed, and things that the developer tries to get rid of.

That's why video games get patches, that's why the larger studios hire full time testers.

It's not a Glitch when it is in practically every Open World Game and is never removed. Ever see a Fence where, if it's short enough, instead of floating over it the Character will have a Leg on the Ground on each side of it?

No?

Yeah I thought so, shut the fuck up with the lame ass excuses. But fine, how about the Health Bars? Doesn't bother you? What about candles not lighting when you give them a blast of fire? No, that's ok I guess. But hell, being able to kill kids is a outright necessity...if you're a lunatic that is.

The difference between all that is that they made the children immortal on PURPOSE, whereas everything you listed is either a glitch or a unimplemented feature (except health bars, but what do health bars have to do with this?).

Yahtzee:
Anyway, everyone knows children never die in fantasy stories, even if everyone else in the village does. 'Cos then the child is expected to go off and train for fifteen years until they're built like a bullock barbecue and can take revenge on the dark lord who orchestrated it all. It's pretty much the law.

This reminds me, im still waiting for a story that takes this basic premise and completely turns it around and inside out...

I do not agree with Jahtzee's criticism of the child killing mod. I would never kill a child in a game, however I still find it hugely annoying that it isn't possible. I can kill everyone and everything in game except for those stupid immortal children. It just doesn't make sense. I might even download that mod, I still won't kill any children but at least the game will feel that much more complete. This "would somebody please think of the children!" attitude bothers me.

Comparing being able to kill every living thing in a game to fucking children goes way to far and is distasteful to say the least.

And even disregarding everything else, why in god's name is killing an adult somehow less evil than killing a child?

Was he stretching for material or was that really his argument?

You wouldn't put the option of fucking kids there because it's illegal, as opposed to fucking (consenting) adults. Meanwhile, murder is just as illegal and immoral in both the case of the adult and the child, maybe the latter is slightly more, but only slightly. In this case, you lose the differences in legality and morality almost entirely.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here