Extra Punctuation: What Is the Matter with You People?

[The Deadpool]

Wanna know the difference between child killing and child raping?

Child killing has been in games before. Older PC games allowed it. People have grown used to it. Hell worrying about getting the Child Killer reputation in Fallout 2 made slaughtering a town a huge decision (Odd that killing 1 child is more damaging that killing a hundred adults, but oh well).

 

[Arakasi]

I think Yahtzee missed the point of the mod.
The main point, is that dragons could easily fire-breathe all over a town, potentially killing all the adults, but if it fire-breathes a kid it just goes right through them, it's really immersion breaking.
It's not that I want to kill kids, it's that I want them to die when they should, like everything else.

As for the rape example, horrible analogy, you don't see a rape option for the adults either so having it for the kids would just be stupid.

Besides, there is already implied child death (e.g. Helgen), so what's wrong with seeing it?

P.S. I find it amusing that this is in Yahtzee's profile : Interests: Being a professional troll, setting fire to childrens' dreams and your mum.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

The dragons are only attacking because they know that they're doomed to extinction the moment after parents realize all they need to do is start arming their utterly invincible offspring. Wouldn't you strike out to protect the future of your species if you were surrounded by potential enemies who could pop out an invincible killing machine every eight years with a 4-6 year shelf life that they could spend killing dragons?

They're all just tragically misunderstood.

 

[Athinira]

You're the kind of person that will make completely obscene jumps in logic and reason to prove their own point, without even listening to what drivel is coming out of their mouths/keyboards.

Seriously, listen to yourself -

Oh, this is irony.

Typically the people who come up with what you just said only did so as an excuse because they actually can't figure out a way to counter the logic in the first place, no matter how hard they try, so it's much easier to dismiss it as "completely absurd".

I'm listening to myself, thank you very much, and i even reread my own post, and i stand by my point: The children in Skyrim is no different than the cops in GTA. They set themselves up as someone who deserves to get axed in the face for several reasons.

So to answer the last part of your post:

Seriously, listen to yourself -

"And in Skyrim, the children happen to be set up as a kind of antagonists"

the children happen to be...antagonists. What? No really, WHAT?

"the game gives you two heavy incentives to kill the smug pricks"

Again. What? Are you sure you're enjoying this epic fantasy quest where the antagonists aren't children, they're undead, giants, monsters, evil men and dragons? Because it sounds like you'd be happier playing Saints Row...

...I'll reply right back: Seriously listen to yourself, because you sound like someone who has become emotionally attached to a bunch of pixels.

You are just like the 238967360893 people i have seen argue who resort to that kind of arguing because they just can't counter the point to begin with (and no, they weren't all arguing with me).

And i enjoy Skyrim, thank you very much. And no, i didn't install the addon in question, but that doesn't mean i understand others who do. And no, i wouldn't be more happy playing Saints Row instead, i actually despise that kind of game. I don't enjoy GTA very much either, but having played it, i just used it to make a point.

 

[Nightwolf214]

I don't think it's the fact that people want to kill children outright, it's more a case of unrealism in video games. I mean come on, every one can die, but not children, thanks to programmed immortality? If I'm going to play a video game where every and any NPC can be killed at will, why is it children get spared? It's a bit of an irk, where many people play games because they're immersive, it just throws this monkey wrench into the system.

 

[Strazdas]

I think the notion of "kill children in RPGs" come form fallout 2, where you had immortal pickpocketing children runing around. they kept stealing your stuff and you couldnt do a thing about it. Also in europe they were moded out to be also INVISIBLE IMMORTAL STEALING CHILDREN. take that.
also, how do you like to have wiped out whole city, burned the building and sitll have 5 children run around like nothing has happened? thats simply silly. Had they went away, ran way or whatever dissapeared it would have been fine with being immortal, but they just have to stroll about in the streets like they are the boss.

a few months ago you talked how "going around the game mechanics" was a thing to be longer for, now you praise game mechanics. ironic isnt it?

 

[Marik Bentusi]

I thought that comparison to the romance options was pretty rubbish. There's no in-universe reason for why kids are completely unaffected by the gameplay-effects of the mayhem (storytelling doesn't spare them tho, they're getting emotional scars left and right), just as there's no in-universe reason for why perfectly innocent civilians are immortal.

Yet you can harm one but not the other, just because of their age. I just don't get it.

With romance it's another thing because of the age of consent and laws, so being able to marry children, pets and dwemer modules wouldn't add to the realism and it wouldn't make sense in-universe - just like the immortal children. And before you go on about sex or rape, there's no option to do that to anyone universally, so that's a global gameplay restriction nobody is this picky about.

If you're not going to apply the same rules to children as to any other NPCs, then why include children at all? It's like they're standing with one foot in the universe, the other being pulled by soccer moms.

 

[ExileNZ]

Oddly enough, I find myself agreeing with him.
But I also agree that invincible kids standing in the middle of dragon breath has to go.

So, here's my solution. Rather than the gormless little shits standing in the middle of a fire and calmly surviving, throw in some of that AI from racing games - have them run out of the way and hide behind walls, not just from dragons but from any attacks.

Mod that in and my immersion won't be ruined by 'invincible kids'.

Until then, you can expect to see me with the child-death mod, because I'm a sucker and I want to waste half my game time reloading quicksaves until I can clear out a village without losing a single, precious child.

That said, I haven't got Skyrim yet. I haven't even played Oblivion, so first things first.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

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.

...An army of Batmen after me?
...Oops...
Well, it's too bad I don't get to adopt them after their parents got killed by a dragon.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

"Jim Middleton said:
Yahtzee, buddy, weren't you the one who said in your review of Fable 2, "I grew bored of happy marriage and decided it was time to murder my entire family. This was the point when I discovered that you can't kill children. So much for total freedom, eh?"

Now I agree with the thrust of this article, and think it is pretty weird that these mods get added, but claiming the moral high ground here with such indignation ring a bit hollow here. After all, "freedom" is hardly a better reason to be able to kill children in games than "realism." "

THIS, pretty much.

Really, Yahtzee, if the game allows you to kill random NPC's they must allow you to do that to ALL of them. Or maybe we should start excluding the option of killing old NPC's? They're frail and all, oh deary me!

NOTHING is as immersion breaking (you love immersion, remember?) as undying children, unless there's a reason for it. And morals from the real world do not count as an ingame reason.

If you could rape people (which I think is ALWAYS the case when children are involved) in a game that'd be really bad, because of what it implies. Murder is nothing to an NPC, it just stops being animated (and annoying). Forcing sex is something way different.
And what is the sex is consentual between adults? You'd be freaking out about gay rights if you could only knob the opposite sex.

So; murder everything; check. Sex with anything; nope.
Stop comparing apples with pears just because you couldn't think of a different topic for your weekly contractual obligation, chap.

 

[CrawlingPastaHellion]

*dons armchair philosopher fez*
Although I understand the desire of a developer to shape the experience though the available actions in-game, the ability to do evil things in a game world makes 'good' choices meaningful. In any game for that matter, are you the "good guy" because the game says so, or because you're avoiding killing civilians and going out of your way to help NPCs because it's the right thing to do?

That's actually a brilliant point, one more reason to add more freedom to our games is to make our choices meaningful. What's the point of being good if that's all you're good for? If performing actions without consequences is masturbation, being forced down one and only possible path is impotence.

Yahtzee might be losing it after all. Tell us, oh, the great one... Was this most recent article a mistake or was everything you ever done and said before nothing more than a mask of insecurity?

 

[Raddra]

See, here's the thing; I think people just want to get back at the kids because as so many people have said they're annoying little shits. Now I don't think that necessarilly means they want to kill them, it's just that they're presented with absolutely no way to get back at the children what-so-ever. Killing them is, however, very easy to mod in. I'm willing to bet that at least half of the people who used that mod would be happy with a non-lethal way to get back at the smug kids. For example, pinching them by their ear lobe and dragging them off to their parents to see if they intended to raise their children to mouth off to the hero of the land...

See, this I would have done if given the option.

Even a conversation option *take the kid to his parents for a good disciplining*

Fade to black, loading

Yo appear in the parents house, both parents warp back with the kid between them.

"I'm sorry Thane, we'll make sure to properly discipline *name* for their behavior and to make sure they respect the cities nobility."

This could have been a good steam perk, Teacher: get mouthed off to and discipline all kids in Skyrim properly!

 

[Lunatix16]

Regarding the first half, when I played through MW3, I kept hoping against hope during the final level that it'll end with Price walking away muttering that Makarov got away again, then switching over to a news reel about a terrorist attack on a tourist hotel resort, with a clip of you shooting at innocent civvies running away.

 

[mr.mystery]

the children are so annoying in skyrim.

 

[walsfeo]

Yahtzee's not saying that being able to have kids be killed in a game - possibly by dragon/creature rampage, being confidently targeted, or intentionally Killing them off is a good or bad thing in itself.

Instead he's saying that folks who go to the extra effort to create and/or install the ability to commit atrocities against youth have their priorities out of whack.

Sure the developers could have programmed better AI's for the munchkins, perhaps running around a bit, then disappearing into the woods. (Or even making the kids cool enough you wouldn't want to kill them.) But the point is someone thinks slaughtering the kids is so important that they invest effort in getting it to work in their game instead of engaging in other cool fantasy adventuring.

 

[walsfeo]

As stinky and gross as most adventurers probably are, after days or weeks on the road, it might have been good for the kids to run away and avoid the creepy stranger until the PC has pretty much proved he isn't a homicidal idiot anyway.

In other words: "You see kids in the distance, but they see you and run the heck away." (Out of range of your attacks.)

 

[Keshie]

There's got to be a psychology thesis in this somewhere.
It's obvious (for several reasons) why modders make the nude mod but not so obvious why they want mortal children versus say; an end to 1 metre high invincible barriers, or imaginary encumbrance limits or when 'reloading' equals topping up the bullet count, or realistic stamina (I challenge all you modders to walk 15 miles carrying only 30 kilos of weight without collapsing and crying yourselves to death).

It doesn't just end with FPS games. In military sim games, modders get quite obsessive over the realism of their weaponry but I've rarely seen a complaint from a flight-sim modder that perhaps bombing raids shouldn't allow civilians to be harmed.

In general, we all want full-on total immersion in our games. That means that within computer-processing limits, we want a full on alternative world experience. We're not getting that.

What we get is a half-arsed pastiche immersion experience that's been thoroughly self-censored by the developers and carefully sold to you by the marketing department.

"ENTER A WORLD OF SWORDS & SORCERY! Buxom beauties and exotic Amazons await your call to arms!", they cry.
"But I want to live in a world of swords & sorcery where I can be a democratic leader and help my people realise their potential in the arts and science and eventually, free all women from slavery and sexual inhibition.", you say.

"TL;DR. Get lost, fag.", they say.


This pisses us off, doesn't it? We want what they promised. To live in a virtual world that's as full as the real world (except that we can be the badasses, if we like) and to be able to go there whenever the real world gets more miserable than it already is.

We **HATE** when we get there and find that there are arbitrary morality rules and lazy physics.

It's like winning a competition that awards you full-body plastic surgery, a new kidney, DNA therapy to remove 10 years of ageing and a million dollars, only to find that the party's being held in Riyadh.

 

[Keshie]

Casanova was famous for his love of women, not children.