Skyrim Child Killing Mod

[Maximum_Power_Cheese_Supreme]

1st: Will the Steam version allow me to install mods?

2nd: I see nothing wrong with this mod, as long as the consequences for killing a child are correct. You receive a greater bounty on your head than you would if you killed an adult. And you are practically forced to live a life on the run from angry parents who don't want you in their village alive, even if you're in prison they'll be waiting outside for you, not that you'd ever see the light of day after being arrested, in fact you'd probably get executed there on the spot buy a guard. (I still have yet to play it and see for myself.)

3rd: What about going to the toilet? Does Gordon Freeman or the Master Chief just go in that suit or do they have adult diapers? What about bathing and hygiene? Those seem like bigger oversights in a game like Oblivion, where there's a sewer system but no toilets, to why there are no children.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

You know, I'm glad that some people like myself are able to differentiate between reality and a game. Yeah, I installed the mod and I killed that little son of a ***** up in Dragonsreach. Does that mean I'm gonna do it in real life? According to some of you, yes, and I should be chemically castrated, and I need to have my head checked.

In fact, I've killed hundreds of video game characters! Am I going to hell?

 

[Maximum_Power_Cheese_Supreme]

I don't need to remind people that children can be evil cretins themselves.

 

[pumuckl]

But they really don't care about gamers in this aspect and that's the thing that pisses me and most others off, they only really care about their image and other such empty things and that is the whole spectrum of consideration regarding this aspect, matters of immersion or consistency be damned.

welcome to capitalism, *hands common sense tophat and reality monocle* you'll need these.

Oh but that's not a free market effect my friend. Unless you're willing to state that a lot of people wouldn't buy the game if they found out that you could kill kids as well as everyone else, then I may be able to see your point.


They didn't do it cause the game wouldn't do well in a capitalist society, they did it cause other people who are the ones who actually don't want to be in a free market system would cry foul and ***** and moan and bother them tremendously, in effect stifling capitalism and enacting communist thought police practices.

True capitalism is all about supply and demand...and there is no such thing as "negative demand", no matter how much some people may not want something in a game it has absolutely no effect on it actual market power, just because some will cry and moan and go on TV and say a bunch of stupid things they still are just single digits as far as capitalism is concerned, those people will simply not play the game and the rest of them will, that's all.


By making a game rated M Bethesda is already excluding every kid below, say...age 10 or so and those are way more sales than those that would have been lost by including child killing. Why did they do that? Well, cause for immersion and consistency reasons you can't have an E-rated Skyrim, despite the fact that it could sell more. Disregarding wider markets to cater to your trusting fans and followers is not incompatible with capitalism, it is in fact the best way of playing it safe and minimizing risks...and I say that including child killing for consistency and role-playing sake is worth it.


*returns hat and monocle, as his Orcish figure is too large for them*

you're right, but i'm talking about stock holders and such. As a game, you only wanna piss off fox sexily, in a way that doesn't offend the average gamer, but actually draws them in, like allowing hot female nord on elf action for instance, which if you noticed they mention every six minutes that you can be a lesbian. What you dont want to have, is someone labeling your game the child killing simulator, which the media would in a heartbeat.

now, a large share of gamers are in fact under the age of 18, or are over 18 and are still man children so their parents buy them the games. You would be loosing profit if mom just heard on the radio that game is about killing children and dragging their limp body around town with you. if you think kids dont play M games just as much as you do, i'd like to ask what age you played mortal kombat the first time.

Also, you run a risk of losing investors who want to avoid that drama (child killing simulator! sponsored by gerber!). If you have read anything about initial pitching in any media industry, you know that target demographics play a huge role in any final product. and bethesda is in the end a company, not your genie who wants to make your wishes come true. they just accidentally almost did. Plus, they'd have to spend extra development time (probobly not much, but still) and we'd all miss out on lesbian nord sex.

too close this off cuz this is way too ranty for my taste, ask yourself, if video games dont operate like normal business, why do they advertise soo damn heavily? why do they have the most attractive display at every major store? why do they release so many statements and trailers making the game seem like god, when everyone who's already there fan and target core audience knows it'll be more walking through dark dank dungeon then battling dragons from atop a tower. Even rockstar these days wants to appeal to the mass, and add more maturity to their grittiness, and we have to deal with it.


/endrant *exhales deeply* holy sh*t try writing a reasonable rant while ur girl IS SCREAMING IN YOUR EAR

But I already said that kids over 10 would play the game man, I never said that only adults play mature games, that was the point, even in the under 10 age group they still lose so many more sales than they would if they made this slight alteration. Similarly, just enabling for kids to die like other NPCs is not more work, in fact it's more work to make em immortal when everything else dies.


I seriously doubt part of pitching skyrim entailed what things in it die and what don't. It pretty much went like this:
Bethesda: "We're making more Elder Scrolls and you're paying for it."
Publisher:"Thanks for the free profits, dinner at 7?"



Games are a business of their own, you can't entirely liken them to books or movies in this aspect as well as the storytelling and interactivity fronts. They advertise for many reasons, most people don't really know about every game ever and are casual about it, the popularity and monetary power of those people who only really know farmville or whatever is stupid to ignore but at the same time I wouldn't take that as a sign of a creator's true intention but more as them, like the publishers, accepting free profits without the ties to fulfill those dragon roof fights they advertise for. Game business models shouldn't try to imitate anything, they should find their own form and adhering to limitations long removed from those mediums is counter-productive.

When was Lolita published...the 50s right? Imagine the controversy of a game tactfully presenting a story about pedophilia...it would be a major shitstorm wouldn't it?

Making kids un-killable in a game as momentous as Skyrim prolongs the period that games will be unable to present stories as troubling as that (well...out of Japan) and that is bad both for my dream game, gaming as a whole and the publisher's pockets as well.



Oh and a personal question...why are you posting from the kitchen?

Advertising is advertising, the same methods they use to hide a crap movie are used to bolster interest in a trailer for a crappy game.

but back too the point, you said it yourself, lolita was tactfully presented. It wasn't tacked on as an extra to an already finished project. There is no reason for the kids to die to make a strong point like in lolita, there was no social commentary attempting to be made.
They are a legitimate company, faced with a decision that would infuriate a mass group of people, while pleasing a vocal minority who will buy the game strictly because elder scrolls is in the title. Those parents with little kids who only see the commercials, thinking it's just another fantasy games, those are the people who will boycott and hurt an elder game, not us, it's fans. I'd bend over even if bethesda's next game was skyrim (in space!)

plus, i run a tight ship here man, gotta keep an eye on the sandwich production or else she tends to slack and i have to tie her to the ironing board again

 

[mirasiel]

That sounds exactly like it should be for such an action in any given D&D game. I commend your players for acting as they did. Probably screwed up the campaign something fierce, but I approve of their handling of the Wizard's actions.

Nah, I write my campaign to be a little looser than that, though yeah its cost the party some very useful allies down the line and they probably will regret it.

The party is more or less 'unaligned' which for these folks tends to mean self-interested but willing to do the right thing.

Of course some of them (wizard) regularly confused 'unaligned' with 'I do whatever I want with no consequences*' ...needless to say he was not pleased when I hate the sole surviving child (well eldest teen, 15 y.o) coup de grace him with a boar spear. I think he would have stormed out of the session except we were playing at his home


*Strangely his new lawful good (stupid) Paladin is exacting the same way but now its 'I do whatever I want with no consequences because god says its ok'

 

[A-D.]

What a interesting Thread. And what interesting Points of View.

Lets break this down. Team A feels justified in having such a Mod because Children being immortal, for that matter any NPC being immortal is utterly stupid in a Game that offers near endless Choice as to how to Play it.

Team B on the other Hand assumes that any Action is fueled by some instinct Desire to act out such a action in real life, or would if they could.

Now lets look at those two Statements right there. Which of the Groups is being retarded at this Point? And im not trying to insult People. It just literally makes no sense. First off, this is a Website mostly about Gaming, so why do we have so many moral crusaders here? Since when did the Escapist become Fox News, claiming Games, or a Choice in a Game is the work of the Devil?

Solutions to such a Problem are simple. Each Game is based on alot of variables that can be put into Action. For example, the Children could be killable by the Environment, that being Triggers, other NPCs and Monsters, however you as a Player can not kill them as you have a specific Variable called Player-Damage, which is Damage only YOU deal, not the NPCs. As such the Children are entirely immune to it and cant be killed by you. Okay solved one Problem.

The other, do NOT make the Children into stupid Assholes. Fallout 3, New Vegas and now Skyrim have that Issue. Why are Children so utterly offensive to the Player? Why would the Community, for any other Reason as the one above have a need for such a Mod? Because the Children in general are utterly annoying. If a Child walks up to me in Real Life and starts throwing remarks at me that it would KNOW would not end well for them, then im perfectly justified lamping them one. Not saying i'd kill them, but yeah, when did we give Children, real or virtual a free Pass to behave however they wish and be untouchable? Dont think i recieved that Memo. In Fallout 1 and 2 for example, the Children werent offensive towards you, hell they were either neutral or actually pretty nice towards you, so killing them was a stupid Thing to do for that reason alone, as you had no reason to even act in such a Manner towards them. Fallout 3, especially every NPC at Little Lamplight seems to be designed to basicly ASK for it to happen, for no other Reason than that they can and thats bogus right there. With the exception of a few NPCs, the Children in Fallout 3 were the most offensive in use of Language towards the Player..IN THE WHOLE GAME.

Once someone makes Children that dont go out of their Way to piss you off on purpose, as well as giving a secondary variable so they can be killed by everyone/anything but the Player, such Mods will exist. For one reason or another.

And to be entirely honest, i dont blame them. When i was a Kid i didnt go up to a Adult wearing heavy Armor, a Twohander and other such gimmicks, or a full automatic Assault Rifle and talk shit to them, hell i didnt do it to any Adults period. So why should i give VIRTUAL Children a free pass on doing it?

Oh and before the flaming commences again. Killing a Child is horrible? So is Murder. So is Genocide. Yet we practice that, in one form or another, in quite a few Games, or at least the Option is there. Dont see moral Crusaders jumping on Modern Warfare cause we can shoot other Soldiers in the Face. Or how about that last town you walked into and killed everyone in the last Game you played? Wasnt evil obviously, you didnt kill any kids, so it cant be "evil".

Double Standards are fun, arent they? Hypocrites. Either no killing at all, or give the Option to kill everything. Or at least dont irritate the Player to a Point that they will actually want to do so.

 

[Pandaman1911]

Good. If you're going to include it in my game, then god damn it, you had better let let me give it a taste of my cold steel.

 

[theultimateend]

Anything done in a single player game is a non-issue.

Anyone who would be swayed by it would have been swayed by something else regardless, like a rainy day or the backfire of a car engine.

 

[Kyogissun]

If anything, it makes tag more believable.

Maybe if the kids weren't such jerks people wouldn't make these as quickly :/

OH MY GOD, THAT WAS FUCKING AAAAAWWWWWWWWWWSOME!!!!!

Oh holy shit man... I just... I need to take a deep breath and calm down from the hyFUCKYEAR GREATEST THING EVER!!

Okay... On a more serious note, I have this to say to Pete Hines and Todd Howard:

Don't respond with the responses you do to people complaining about kids being protected when your devs/programmers DELIBERATELY program them to act like little shits. 4 out of every 5 kids in Skyrim are completely annoying and/or obnoxious in their behavior. If you didn't want people whining, you shouldn't have made them act like they do.

I'm not saying kids have to be complete angels in that game but for fucks sake, do not make a MAJORITY of the children in the game behave like little assholes.

But on a serious note, bethesda seriously needs to retool the 'favorites' system and let console players customize it so they can make SETS of favorites. I'd like to be able to make up a set wherein I choose the weapon/spell/armor/shout loadout all in one button press, as it would be REALLY useful to swap from say, an assassin skill set with throw voice, a bow and my shrouded armor to my rogue build with light armor I've enchanted, weapons I've enchanted and marked for death as my shout.

Seriously bethesda, that's what the favorite system SHOULD have worked like, rather than just making it so people can access whatever they want in a huge fucking list.

 

[kenu12345]

If your argument against killing children is based upon my moral standings, then it's no where near "half-assed" to use the same argument against a "common" murder. Killing a child is not "more" wrong than killing an adult!
It seems like it basicly comes down to this: Killing a child is wrong and therefore you shouldn't be able to do that. Call it child abuse if you wish, it doesn't change anything. A murder is a murder no matter the age of the victim.

Pish tush lol. The people who have railed against my unfortunately-visible post have all been calling me too prudish, too black-and-white, but you're taking it to another level entirely.

If we want to be realistic about it: Killing men has different connotations to killing kids, it's reflected in how people who kill children are reserved for the hardest hitting episodes, it's reflected in how people freaked out about that Modern Warfare 3 scene. It's not considered as bad as killing kids, at least in the eyes of mass media.

But it's not an arena for 'realistic'; people have been killing adults in video games for many decades, in hundreds of different situations. To counter my argument - that I'm glad Skyrim doesn't let you kill kids, it's wrong to do that - by saying "well then you shouldn't accept the killing of adults" is, in a word, difficult. I think the underlying point to this is powerful enough: That you are going to stop at nothing to go against my initial, hard-line view (which is exactly how I wanted it to come across, for the sake of discussion - devil's advocate stuff) and I am going to stop at nothing to call all of your counter-arguments cliched.

Ah, well, I could... stop...

please there was more complaints with the no russian mission of MW2 then there was for that 5 second scene

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

Honestly, it has way less to do with "killing kids" than to not having essential NPCs all over the damn place.
There is nothing more frustrating than NPCs that won't die. It has nothing to do with them being children. The kids just happen to be marked essential also.

 

[kenu12345]

What about Jarls? I'm noticing nobody seems to have brought up that quest givers, scripted sacrifices and Jarls can't be outright killed. Just knocked down for a bit.

they have in fact look one post above you or better yet here

Honestly, it has way less to do with "killing kids" than to not having essential NPCs all over the damn place.
There is nothing more frustrating than NPCs that won't die. It has nothing to do with them being children. The kids just happen to be marked essential also.

 

[Frostbite3789]

What does it say about your mental health that you want to kill children in a videogame?
Would you do it in real life?

I also doubt I'd partake in carjacking. Or skydive out of a plane while shooting guys. (Saints Row the Third.)

Shoot fireballs out of my hands or wield any kind of sword. (TES games.)

Be in space. (Mass Effect games.)

Have a favorite store on the Citadel. (Mass Effect 2.)

Wear white robes and assassinate people. (AC series)

And numerous other things I totally do in games all the time, but not in real life. It's strange, I know.

 

[DSD12]

Look this like most people have said make children less annoying then no one would complain about not killing them it is as simple as that.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

What does it say about your mental health that you want to kill children in a videogame?
Would you do it in real life? No. The other day, around 2am at Jack in the Box some 14 year old fuck was giving me and my buddies shit. For a solid hour. We're adults, early to mid twenties. No one was there to help him and even the workers expressed the desire to throw him out on his ass.
He did not leave until I threatened him with a knife. Would I have seriously hurt him? Not with the knife, but it got my point across.
So you know what I do in Skyrim? Ignore the shits.

Who cares if you could do it in earlier games? Who cares if the community wants it? IT'S.FUCKED.UP. And you're fucked up for wanting it so bad. Get help, and stay the fuck out of my neighborhood because if I saw you I would think of the kids next door and run your ass over without thinking twice.

Next time you're on a date/talking with your significant other, tell her about how good it makes you feel to kill kids in a video game, see how it goes.

You've killed millions of adults in videogames. Something neither you or I would do in real life. Yet we do in it in a video game without a second thought. Now tell me, logically, why killing pixels of children instead of killing pixels of adults is any different?

Personally, I'm gonna download this mod just for immersion reasons, I won't be killing children personally and I don't really get why anyone would want to (even though they are annoying little shits in the game). But if theres a dragon attack or a bandit raid or something and lots of people die but the children remain unscratched it pulls me out of the game a bit. Also, if I see a child die in the game there will be an added layer of sadness and unease since its not something you see very often in games. Most people want it because it just adds to the freedom of the game.

However, I agree with you that I'm a bit weirded out by how badly people here want to slay in-game children. But I think its silly to assume that because people do it in a game they would have any similar thoughts of doing it in real life, games are all about escapism you know? But yeah people on this forum tend to be a little.. extreme.. in many ways when it comes to their entertainment. It's all part of being a nerd I think.

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

*snip*

Oh and before the flaming commences again. Killing a Child is horrible? So is Murder. So is Genocide. Yet we practice that, in one form or another, in quite a few Games, or at least the Option is there. Dont see moral Crusaders jumping on Modern Warfare cause we can shoot other Soldiers in the Face. Or how about that last town you walked into and killed everyone in the last Game you played? Wasnt evil obviously, you didnt kill any kids, so it cant be "evil".

Double Standards are fun, arent they? Hypocrites. Either no killing at all, or give the Option to kill everything. Or at least dont irritate the Player to a Point that they will actually want to do so.

*sigh* I really wanted to leave this alone.

You are missing the lynchpin here and that is context A child gets hit and killed by a car while running across the road; that's a tragedy. It is discovered that the same child was running away from the playground where he stabbed and killed another kid for his lunch money; that muddies the waters big time. Context is everything.

If you think that two opposing, heavily armed, well trained groups of soldiers killing each other in the theatre of war is the same as a bratty child being decapitated by a heavily armoured brute because they said something like "I'm not scared of you" then you've got bigger issues than a mod that allows you to do so.

You've killed millions of adults in videogames. Something neither you or I would do in real life. Yet we do in it in a video game without a second thought. Now tell me, logically, why killing pixels of children instead of killing pixels of adults is any different?

To give you an honest answer, I personally think it is due to the underlying instinct some people have to protect those who can't adequately stand up for themselves. It may be an outdated concept, but that's my thinking.