I WANNA KILL CHILDREN!

[Alistar_Helloise]

Lol u funnny TC, but I disagree with you.

Big NO to killing children in games. Programmers put into the game a certain code of ethics.

For example, Corvo cannot hurt Emily in Dishonored.

Should you try to kill the loyalists in Dishonored like a random murdering psychopath the conspiracy is dissolved.

You cannot kill children in Skyrim because be honest, killing a child because you are angry?

Look, some children are annoying as F**** I get that, but murdering them? Bro, not cool.

You were a child too, and I guarantee you were annoying as **** Every child is annoying as **** at leas thirty times, fact. No child is perfect.

Does that mean you should have been killed? I should hope not.

If it's about sending a message, then I want nothing to do with this message of child killing.

So killing thousands of men and women ingame is alright but killing a child is crossing the line?That's a fucked up code of ethics then.

Because, here is the thing. A child is blue hope, an idea that this one can be more than we could, having the option to kill them when they can hardly defend themselves is not only a bad idea its unethical.


Also, it's not like I play Skyrim with the idea that I'm going to kill thousands of people because I can. No, I kill people because A: They attack me, or B: They threaten me C: They pick a fight with me and the only way to beat them is to death.

But the TC? He wants to kill these kids because they are stupid children who are openly disrespecting him. . . . .

Except these kids are just bits of game code...why is it okay to massacre thousands of adults but if children are involved they are off limits?Nobody is advocating the murder of real children here so trying to argue it's okay to kill X but leave Y alone does'nt make any sense to me.

Emily Kaldwin was bits of game code, but I genuinely cared for her while playing Dishonored.

These children are bits of game code but they upset the TC enough to warrant the TC wanting them dead.

The illusion created by the game code reveals something in all of us.

It can be a fine appetite for art and science, a hatred for certain things, righteousness or villainy. I'd like to think that I am righteous in my actions with hatred and a fine appetite for arts and sciences, although if pushed too far I can be no different from a villain.

 

[Unsilenced]

Hold on, you're just thinking that because they're children. Pay more attention to the game, every Bethesda character is equally annoying and poorly-written.

That said, the Enclave just appearing was a plothole which I suspect you weren't meant to pick up on. I don't think anyone on the dev team actually considered how they got in. It's possible they have detailed schematics for all the vaults and managed to find another hidden entrance, which would explain why they basically drop in from the ceiling.

They probably came in the front door, which you couldn't get through because it was too irradiated.

But the vault door was sealed shut and the radiation was so intense that even with the best anti rad gear/perks your character can't stay near the door for a few seconds before dying.

Oh yeah. They all have super fancy anti-rad stuff. You know, like they used when James flooded the chamber wi-OH WAIT NO LOL THEY ALL DIED HORRIBLY IN SECONDS. Sure Autumn had his Plot Pill, but that still put him in a coma or something.

Also, the radiation is lethal several times over even with every possible rad measure in the game up. Unless they had something that give absolute, 100% rad protection (which conveniently, never shows up in any of the lore, nevermind actually appearing in the game), they would die in seconds near the door.

Also, the Enclave is kind of there "hot on the heels" of the player. If they'd done the research to know a super secret method of how to get in, they'd probably have figured out the whole "there's a fucking GECK" thing before too, and nicked it before the player was but a twinkle in his father's eyes.

Peacefully frolkicking their way through a village of bratty mutie kids that they could have easily dispatched without nicking their armor *is* actually the best explanation.


Personally I wouldn't have minded Little Lamplight if for the following changes:

1: Don't put it somewhere were the Enclave have to go through and then have them unaffected by that.
2: Don't have it be the most self-sufficient and well protected civilization in the entire fucking game. They're a bunch of kids. How are they just casually dispatching hoards of mutants and slavers that beat the fucking BoS to a pulp?
3: Give you a way and a motivation to help them. Honestly the whole "being a bunch of brats" thing wouldn't have come off as so bad if they weren't also immortal god-brats who are apparently only kept from conquering the entire wastes by their nap times. Even if you can't let the player kill them, at least make them talk/act as if they can be killed. Or have ever conceived of the idea of "danger" in their lives. They're a bunch of kids trapped with scavenged supplies in a mineshaft. Why are they doing so much better than factions full of trained soldiers, power armored heavies, and fucking laser-shooting miniguns? Pretty much every faction has a bunch of quests that are life-or-death matters to them, but the kids in the mineshaft are just like "nah man we're pretty good."

The only way which any of this makes sense is if the child immortality is actually a real, lore-friendly thing, such that the kids themselves actually know about it.

Hey, maybe the Enclave knew it too. That could be why they didn't attack lamplight. They knew those kids could kill every last one of them and raze Raven Rock to the ground.

IT MAKES SENSE. CHILD IMMORTALITY CONFIRMED FOR CANON.

 

[Alleged_Alec]

Hold on, you're just thinking that because they're children. Pay more attention to the game, every Bethesda character is equally annoying and poorly-written.

I don't know. Most of the adults in Bethesda games don't actually annoy me quite as badly for not reason as kids do in them. Sure, in Morrowind there was lots of casual racism if you played the wrong race or whatever, but it was justified by the setting. In no way was Little Lamplight justified. It was fucking gate made of corrugated metal. I should've been able to just threaten them to open the gate or else I'd use my nuke launcher. What they did there was taunt the player because they know you cannot do anything about it. You have to do that quest, you have to go through that stupid, nonsensical and blood pressure raising brick of pure awfulness.

So yeah. The difference for me is this: the adults in these games mostly have a decent reason to be annoying, and when I get really sick of them, I can always backhand them or whatever. The children and plot-vital NPCs, on the other hand, can be annoying just because they, the programmers, know you can't do anything about it.

Lol u funnny TC, but I disagree with you.

Big NO to killing children in games. Programmers put into the game a certain code of ethics.

For example, Corvo cannot hurt Emily in Dishonored.

Should you try to kill the loyalists in Dishonored like a random murdering psychopath the conspiracy is dissolved.

You cannot kill children in Skyrim because be honest, killing a child because you are angry?

Look, some children are annoying as F**** I get that, but murdering them? Bro, not cool.

You were a child too, and I guarantee you were annoying as **** Every child is annoying as **** at leas thirty times, fact. No child is perfect.

Does that mean you should have been killed? I should hope not.

If it's about sending a message, then I want nothing to do with this message of child killing.

So killing thousands of men and women ingame is alright but killing a child is crossing the line?That's a fucked up code of ethics then.

Because, here is the thing. A child is blue hope, an idea that this one can be more than we could, having the option to kill them when they can hardly defend themselves is not only a bad idea its unethical.


Also, it's not like I play Skyrim with the idea that I'm going to kill thousands of people because I can. No, I kill people because A: They attack me, or B: They threaten me C: They pick a fight with me and the only way to beat them is to death.

But the TC? He wants to kill these kids because they are stupid children who are openly disrespecting him. . . . .

My god, man, get over yourself and off your high horse.

We play games to blow off steam. I don't play games to play myself, but just in another setting. In real life I will look the other way when people get on my nerves, but the beauty is, in games I don't have to. I may do so, if I'm playing the kind of character that would, but in Bethesda games I tend to play low-intelligence barbarians with no self-control, mostly because trying to roleplay anything else in a Bethesda game is going to cause such huge suspensions of disbelieve my immersion comes crashing down at every other dialogue option. That means that when he's confronted with people challenging him, be it a 10-foot skeleton warrior or a kid, he's going to take them seriously and try to cut them up.


If you like to play a reluctant killer in video games: that's fine. I tend to reserve that for table top, since doing it in video games rarely works in my experience. But just because you actually like doing that doesn't mean that everyone things about it the same way. Some may, like me, be roleplaying a cross between Snide Wiplash and Hitler. Others see it as just a video game, and want to kill stuff for the loot. But talking about killing virtual children because they cannot defend themselves makes it unethical? That just makes it sound like you haven't the capability to separate the video game from the real world.

 

[GloatingSwine]

Get on Xbox Live, play CoD, all the squeakers you can shoot.

And you'll know about it from the rage messages you'll get after matches.

 

[Vern5]

Children are smarter then they are given credit for and can adapt to harsh situations.

If that's really the case, then Little Lamplight makes perfect sense. Those kids were just that adaptable and badass, which isn't entirely impossible given the history of the Fallout universe.

I don't know where you get this idea that all kids are highly adaptable little geniuses. A child is just a small adult with zero life experience. They only know exactly what they are told and simple concepts that we take for granted like sexuality and deceit generally pass right over their heads. There are smart kids, of course, but they are the exception and certainly not the rule.

A child's perception lacks a great degree of context, which is normally obtained through life experience and the passing of time. Because of this, they don't always know to fear things up until the point where they become dangerous. This is why kids are constantly injuring themselves; they don't appreciate danger until they get hurt, whereupon their worldview changes and they (hopefully) become more cautious.

This is why the kids of Little Lamplight are so rude to the Lone Wanderer. Most adults (or adult sized creatures) that poke their head into LL are raiders or Super Mutants. Naturally, the interlopers cause trouble and then die horribly. The kids of Little Lamplight have never met a person they couldn't kill. So why would they be afraid of anyone?

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Children are smarter then they are given credit for and can adapt to harsh situations.

If that's really the case, then Little Lamplight makes perfect sense. Those kids were just that adaptable and badass, which isn't entirely impossible given the history of the Fallout universe.

I don't know where you get this idea that all kids are highly adaptable little geniuses. A child is just a small adult with zero life experience. They only know exactly what they are told and simple concepts that we take for granted like sexuality and deceit generally pass right over their heads. There are smart kids, of course, but they are the exception and certainly not the rule.

A child's perception lacks a great degree of context, which is normally obtained through life experience and the passing of time. Because of this, they don't always know to fear things up until the point where they become dangerous. This is why kids are constantly injuring themselves; they don't appreciate danger until they get hurt, whereupon their worldview changes and they (hopefully) become more cautious.

This is why the kids of Little Lamplight are so rude to the Lone Wanderer. Most adults (or adult sized creatures) that poke their head into LL are raiders or Super Mutants. Naturally, the interlopers cause trouble and then die horribly. The kids of Little Lamplight have never met a person they couldn't kill. So why would they be afraid of anyone?

Again, that is the biggest problem with Little Lamplight. A bunch of kids aren't surviving in that hot spot of danger. What do they do for supplies? Do they send out raiding parties or do they get traders (would traders even travel to a place that dangerous?)?. How do they keep repopulating to sustain themselves when they are constantly losing kids in battle and to their age limit (You can't tell me that a big number of orphans survive the journey to get there even if they knew where exactly to look. The wasteland is too dangerous.)? Why do they magically lose the ability to sufficiently hold off the Super Mutants when they grow up (Big Town)?

 

[Vern5]

(You can't tell me that a big number of orphans survive the journey to get there even if they knew where exactly to look. The wasteland is too dangerous.)? Why do they magically lose the ability to sufficiently hold off the Super Mutants when they grow up (Big Town)?

How should I know how they do it? If I had to guess, I would say that LL is an extremely defensible position. Entering little lamplight to attack it would be a fool's errand for anyone without power armor. But honestly, I'm not sure how they pulled it off. Who's to say what a tribe of children can achieve in a post-apocalyptic world? I believe that if child soldier's exist, then child survivalists are not so far-fetched.

The fact is that, however they were surviving, they were doing pretty damn well. They have a right to be smug.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

(You can't tell me that a big number of orphans survive the journey to get there even if they knew where exactly to look. The wasteland is too dangerous.)? Why do they magically lose the ability to sufficiently hold off the Super Mutants when they grow up (Big Town)?

How should I know how they do it? If I had to guess, I would say that LL is an extremely defensible position. Entering little lamplight to attack it would be a fool's errand for anyone without power armor. But honestly, I'm not sure how they pulled it off. Who's to say what a tribe of children can achieve in a post-apocalyptic world? I believe that if child soldier's exist, then child survivalists are not so far-fetched.

The fact is that, however they were surviving, they were doing pretty damn well. They have a right to be smug.

Defensible position? Have you seen their gate? You could take that down with an axe. They have a right to be smug because of bad writing, which is the point that a lot of people were trying to make.