Skyrim Child Killing Mod

[Smeggs]

"I work with my mother-"
"NOT ANYMORE! *AXE*"

Seriously though, "Broken?" I find it hilariously pathetic that some (note: SOME) PC gamers seem to feel they were entitled to be able to commit attrocities such as slaughtering children.

Oh, internet.

 

[Tipatap]

Why are people even arguing about this?

Because a fair few people here honestly believe installing this mod means:

a) you only intend to use the mod to act out your child killing fantasies (a fair few including me have pointed out we don't give a damn about that, is more about children being vulnerable to hostile enemies like dragons same as any other npc but no1 on the "other side" seems to want to adress this for some reason)

b)That this is proof that you hate kids and should never ever have kids and will be a terrible parent (see the guy a bit above actually calling for chemical castration, which is actually kinda sexist now i think about... so all this only applies to males and women are incapable of such deviancy? fuck me...)

Allegory isn't equation, nice try though.

It indeed isn't, but think s/he meant it in the sense of equetable/equatability
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/equate

Actually, I have a request. Would somebody from the viewpoint against this child-killing mod respond to point A of the above post? I've mentioned earlier my opinions, and upon reflection, have never seen this particular point answered. If I've missed you, I apologize, but I still feel obligated to call it to attention. I'm not trolling, to make myself clear. I'm looking for a clear and concise opinion from someone regarding this.

 

[Jezzascmezza]

I just hope some of the game-bashing idiots in the media don't mistake this mod for an actual feature in the game.

 

[Amnestic]

It was really bizarre watching the party reactions after that, half of them didn't care (only goblins after all), one of them straight up attacked the wizard for child killing and the rest were horrified and were completely off-kilter all night.

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.

 

[Micalas]

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.

I wouldn't say "exactly" how it should be handled every game. It really depends on his party's alignments.

 

[Smeggs]

i'm so sick of protecting the children! they're not that special ok?
children are not the future. children are the present. adults are the future. children are only valuable to society because they are potential adults.
and yes, it may shock you to know, children are not immortal. mkay pumpkin?

So...basically what you just stated is exactly what the phrase "children are the future" means...

They BECOME adults. They BECOME the future of the world. You just basically reinforced what you were trying to argue against.

 

[mrhappy1489]

WHy you need that? Oo Seriously, why would you want a mod to kill children?

Because the kids in this game are abusive little shits, basically. And despite having Canadian-Scandinavian accented parents, they're ALL American.

I agree with how annoying the little shits are, but I will make the point that there needs to be a mod so you can kill the children in Fable 2. They are much more fucking annoying especially your own child who kept running away and your wife begged you to rescue the little retard (at least you could abandon that child though).

 

[Kashrlyyk]

....

However, this is a COMPLETELY different thing than feeling justified in killing children. The kids are little shits who obviously can only be corrected with the cold kiss of hard steel to their faces. What you are talking about is ENTITLEMENT to kill adolescents, whether virtual or not. As soon as you talk about your right to take your anger towards obsequious behavior out in the form of murdering younglings, all reason and logic has left your argument. Instead of realism in a game, you instead insist on the ability to create a simulacrum of hate, an effigy you can burn, and a figure upon which you can transpose a real-world frustration on a virtual one...you haven't even remembered that the scene you so long to "re-enact" is one of the events that pushed a hero toward the darkside. Let us also not forget that you may take those frustrations and angers out on EVERY...OTHER...form of life in Skyrim, regardless of whether Polar Bears are endangered or not...the position you take is diminished considerably when you take into account that you are raging against something that you are not allowed to do, rather than focusing on the myriad of disturbing things you are allowed to do. It smacks of only being interested in the cookie jar when it is placed atop the refrigerator.

In that regard, I applaud Bethesda for keeping out of the controversy in keeping their children immortal due to player action (but come on, they can die for the sake of plot, can't they?), and further respect them for sticking to their guns when confronted about it. Pete Hines should get a raise.

This, so much this. Particular the highlighted sentence. Having people on here complaining about NOT being allowed to murder children and calling it "immersion breaking" while at the same time they don't care that being able to singlehandedly and without any real consequences to kill EVERY NPC in the game. How can it be that those people don't recognize that as MUCH more immersion breaking?

"Lopsided Weener" is crying about NOT being able to kill a child in the middle of the city, because it is "immersion breaking". How much would you cry if can kill that child but the second you do, you are immediately arrested and executed?

Then we have "Azure-Supernova" whose problem it is that he can kill everyone in the world but children and he doesn't realize that being able to "kill everyone and getting away with it" is the problem not the immortality of children.

"ZenoX969" wants to play "A murdering thieving asshole who's only looking out for his best interests. Now why can't this guy, who would murder any random person if it meant a few coins, also be a psychopathic child killer?"

Are you wondering as I do, why he wants to "roleplay" a guy that will get "caught very soon and executed"? Sorrym I forgot that last part is not included in this "RPG".

You know what is immersion breaking? Murdering people in plain sight and getting away with it. Bethesda claims to have changed the AI to send murderers after you if you kill a citizen, but for the player that is not a consequence only more XP. Everyone on here that thinks not being able to kill children is an immersion breaker you are fucking lying to yourself. You don't care about immersion at all.

Thank you Bethesda for making children immortal. For showing the hypocrisy of those "roleplayers".

 

[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.