The Sims 3 berates you for having a child out of 'wedlock' Yes they use that word...

[DracoSuave]

That's their problem then. You can get married at a courthouse for a tiny amount, or have a church wedding for well less than the multi-thousand dollar blowout that you see on shows like Bridezillas. Not getting married because you want some ridiculous cinderella wedding is nothing but an excuse, and not a particularly good one. I will say that I can understand couples who can't get married right away because of financial issues, but if they really want to commit with their partner, to have children and grow old together, they should be working toward that wedding. If they don't want all that, they shouldn't be having children in the first place.

Does marriage magically cause people to be more likely to stay together? Not any more.

So how does a contract that doesn't actually create more commitment magically be a sign of commitment?

The only evidence of commitment in any relationship is how long it's going on. If you have a couple that's been together for decades, I defy you to show evidence there's no commitment there, marriage or not. They have, through virtue of their mutual commitment to each other, outlasted the average length of a marriage by more than double.

Marriage is not commitment. Only commitment is commitment.

Your value judgements on the issue should be constrained to your ring finger and that of your partner. Beyond that, you should mind your own damn business.

-snip-

I could not disagree more! Why is marriage the be all and end all of a relationship? In what way is it irresponsible to have children and not be married? Surely being in a relationship and having children is pretty commited, you don't need a piece of paper to prove anything.

Did you read what I wrote about visitation and property rights? Marriage is a contract that protects everyone involved, both the married couple and their children. That piece of paper does quite a bit more than just "prove (something)."

Well, then that has very little to do with commitment. And I would argue that a better solution would be to alter laws to allow for common-law partners to have more rights, or something along those lines, rather than force people to marry in order to gain certain rights. I think it's awful that people can live together for decades, but if they aren't married then if one of them dies the other can end up with nothing.

The fact that they lived together for decades without getting married is what shows the lack of commitment -- if you're in it for the long haul, do yourself a favor and get married.

But some people just don't want to get married, and I think that by staying together that does show commitment. I don't think that people should have to get married jsut to 'prove' their commitment.

I say to both of you: marriage is a contract that gives all sorts of legal benefits. If you are committed enough to stay together for decades, there is not a reason in the world not to get married, and tons of reasons to get married. There are lots of excuses for not getting married, but very few valid reasons.

Except that in many jurisdictions, a common law marriage gives you those benefits anyways. So... if you're getting them... why do you need to spend money on a contract to get them?

Ah yes, to satisfy jerks who don't know how to mind their own damn business.

I can tell you this: nowhere in the US does it give you all of the rights of a real marriage, and in fact, there isn't such a thing as a commonlaw marriage over much of the country. There was a thread in R&P about this recently, and even Canada, which does confer most of the rights in a commonlaw marriage, doesn't confer all of them. Add in the fact that this game was made in the US, and you start to understand why the thing in the game makes sense.

And the rights it does not give you, to some people, are not worth the trade in restrictions and expense.

I don't know how that is difficult for you to understand, that when there is a cost to something, and you do not feel what you get for that cost is worth the cost, that it is absolutely rational to not incur that cost. It's not an 'excuse'. It's not 'invalid.' It's 100% rational.

And regardless, it's still none of your business.

 

[Neverhoodian]

Its to do with the Goal Set you pick at the start (cant remember if thats what its called). You get it if you take the family one where the goals are to get married and have children.

So wait...

You CHOOSE at the beginning whether to have this set goal, and the game punishes you from straying from this set goal, and people are in a tiff?

More people in this thread need to chill them m****f*****z the hell out.

The only way you'd get this is by your own choice. Don't like it? Don't choose to go after it.

THIS IS NOT HARD PEOPLE


This thread has gone to seven pages of over-reaction, and only ONE PERSON has mentioned the correct context.

f you don't take the time to figure out the context of something, you're going to look like an idiot when you get offended and it turns out to NOT be the situation you're offended about.

Like this instance. There's a ton of people offended by it, but only one voice of reason saying 'Guys, you only get it if you fail a life goal.' It's voluntary. You can't get this without choosing to play within that ruleset. Some people want to play with that ruleset, so they do. Others do not, so they do not. It's not a values judgement. It's not a commentary on society. It's a game mission fail, and nothing more.

Chill.

I agree. Based on this info (I've never actually played the game, so feel free to correct me on this) you'll only get this message if your character is a celebrity and they've stated that one of their life goals is to get married before having a baby.

If a real celebrity bragged that they were going to "tie the knot" before raising a family, then turned around and had a child out of wedlock, you'd bet that they'd catch lots of flak for it. Yes it's petty and overly-critical. Then again, people are often petty and overly-critical about such things, particularly when celebrities are involved.

I also noticed that there appears to be a timer for the "Publicly Disgraced" condition, meaning that the debuff will disappear after a few days. Again, it's much like real life as the public loses interest in the "scandal" and moves on to other things.

I will concede that perhaps the message might have been better-received if its wording wasn't so provocative, but does this really warrant being so worked up over?

 

[DracoSuave]

Pretty much sums up my views on this.

I find this video offensive. Continue.

 

[TheScientificIssole]

Is there another public disgracing for having a relationship with a black person?

Dear EA, were passed all that crap, grow up. Sincerely, world.

That's ridiculous. Societies view isn't racist and having children and not being married aren't generally viewed as normal.
Also

Wait, these are the same people who that made Dante's Imferno and Dead Space.

Hypocritical much?

I agree. You've got two games like Dante's Inferso and Dead Space that have plots heavily centred around celebrating having children out of wedlock and then they go and make this game.

Hell, my favourite part of Dante's Infergo was when Dante went up to that chick who had a kid out of wedlock and said "There's no shame in having a kid out of wedlock" and then turned to the camera and gave one of those hand signs where your hand is mostly a fist but your thumb is pointing away from your fist.

And let's not forget that part in Dead Space where the guy finds out that people were shunning him for having a child out of wedlock so he drop kicks those motherfuckers.

I think they should find the one person who made Dead Space, Dante's Interno and The Sims 3 and ask them to explain this outrageous behaviour.

You win.

 

[Ryengu]

I suppose it's meant to reflect the type of society in the game. If it's supposed to be some sort of high-class area, then that sounds like the reaction one would expect from the other residents. Rich people do that, yaknow.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Everyone is saying that the general view of socety and the media that children out of wedlock is taboo.

I pretty much thought that was left behind in the 60's

Shows what I know.

 

[b3nn3tt]

marriage is a contract that gives all sorts of legal benefits. If you are committed enough to stay together for decades, there is not a reason in the world not to get married, and tons of reasons to get married. There are lots of excuses for not getting married, but very few valid reasons.

A very good point, and I agree with you that marriage does bestow a lot of benefits on a couple that they couldn't get if they don't marry. But I would argue that that isn't right, as it pretty much forces people to get married if they want to enjoy those benefits, whereas I think that the commitment itself should be enough. Unfortunately, that isn't the way the law works at the moment, and I think that is a damn shame.

Well, the way I see it, you need a contract to bestow those rights anyway. The way it works, and the way it has always worked, is that that contract is called a marriage contract. You could call it something else, like a civil union, but what's the point? You may as well call a spade a spade.

But I'm saying that I don't think that a contract is necessary, I think that living together for twenty years is proof enough of the commitment that people have. Although I suppose there would be problems in determining what is an 'acceptable' amount of time for people to live together in order for certain rights to apply, in which case it probably would be easier for the couple to just get married. I just don't like the fact that people have to get married if they want any kind of rights.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

It's not...My Sims life goal is to be a master chef. As you can clearly see in the screenshot. The big gold chefs hat kind of gives it away. How is that anything to do with having children?!?

They are simply wrong. Which is why everyone is ignoring them.

 

[Macrobstar]

Its to do with the Goal Set you pick at the start (cant remember if thats what its called). You get it if you take the family one where the goals are to get married and have children.

So wait...

You CHOOSE at the beginning whether to have this set goal, and the game punishes you from straying from this set goal, and people are in a tiff?

More people in this thread need to chill them m****f*****z the hell out.

The only way you'd get this is by your own choice. Don't like it? Don't choose to go after it.

THIS IS NOT HARD PEOPLE


This thread has gone to seven pages of over-reaction, and only ONE PERSON has mentioned the correct context.

f you don't take the time to figure out the context of something, you're going to look like an idiot when you get offended and it turns out to NOT be the situation you're offended about.

Like this instance. There's a ton of people offended by it, but only one voice of reason saying 'Guys, you only get it if you fail a life goal.' It's voluntary. You can't get this without choosing to play within that ruleset. Some people want to play with that ruleset, so they do. Others do not, so they do not. It's not a values judgement. It's not a commentary on society. It's a game mission fail, and nothing more.

Chill.

She didnt pick that goal....

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

marriage is a contract that gives all sorts of legal benefits. If you are committed enough to stay together for decades, there is not a reason in the world not to get married, and tons of reasons to get married. There are lots of excuses for not getting married, but very few valid reasons.

A very good point, and I agree with you that marriage does bestow a lot of benefits on a couple that they couldn't get if they don't marry. But I would argue that that isn't right, as it pretty much forces people to get married if they want to enjoy those benefits, whereas I think that the commitment itself should be enough. Unfortunately, that isn't the way the law works at the moment, and I think that is a damn shame.

Well, the way I see it, you need a contract to bestow those rights anyway. The way it works, and the way it has always worked, is that that contract is called a marriage contract. You could call it something else, like a civil union, but what's the point? You may as well call a spade a spade.

But I'm saying that I don't think that a contract is necessary, I think that living together for twenty years is proof enough of the commitment that people have. Although I suppose there would be problems in determining what is an 'acceptable' amount of time for people to live together in order for certain rights to apply, in which case it probably would be easier for the couple to just get married. I just don't like the fact that people have to get married if they want any kind of rights.

I see what you're saying, but you hit the tip of the issue with that thing about deciding how long they have to live together; not only do you have to decide that, but you have to be able to prove it, and there's all sorts of other issues -- for example, when you decide to split up after a commonlaw marriage, how do you divide the property? Standard marriage contracts have provisions for this, and the pre-nup is an additional contract that allows for more equitable provisions, but it's got to be difficult to do this with a commonlaw marriage. Add this to the fact that you would have to prove co-habitation, and the fact that you wouldn't have the rights of a marriage for all the years that you were trying to prove it, and a simple marriage contract starts to look a lot better.

 

[Macrobstar]

You think that's bad? This is a picture of MY Baby.

Spoiler

GAH! FUCK!
Kill it with fire!

 

[Littaly]

The impression I get from the whole "celebrity" feature (which is supremely annoying because suddenly everyone treats you like the most exciting thing in town just because you talked a little with some dude) is to make you a tabloid type celebrity. So the "publicly disgraced" debuff is less you being ashamed of doing something bad and more about the public wanting their juicy scandal. The way I interpret it isn't that The Sims 3 is against kids outside of marriage, but rather that it perceives the tabloids and the people who read them as being people who consider it a "scandal". I don't know if that's any less outrageous, but it's the way I interpret it ^^

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

The impression I get from the whole "celebrity" feature (which is supremely annoying because suddenly everyone treats you like the most exciting thing in town just because you talked a little with some dude) is to make you a tabloid type celebrity. So the "publicly disgraced" debuff is less you being ashamed of doing something bad and more about the public wanting their juicy scandal. The way I interpret it isn't that The Sims 3 is against kids outside of marriage, but rather that it perceives the tabloids and the people who read them as being people who consider it a "scandal". I don't know if that's any less outrageous, but it's the way I interpret it ^^

What frustrated me was my sim didnt set out to be a celebrity she just made friends with people for her job and did well in her career so techincally I didn't choose for her to be a celebrity and have her life picked at by tabloids lol

This debuff just kind of felt a little vicious I guess. Otherwise I wouldn't have bothered to make this thread.

You think that's bad? This is a picture of MY Baby.

Spoiler

GAH! FUCK!
Kill it with fire!

I love the way the guy up in the corner has obviously deformed the baby for his own monetary gain lol.

 

[emeraldrafael]

eh? in this day and age, that's not exactly a rare thing iun the real world.

though its kinda odd that the sims wants to just blatantly address the issue in this way.

... cant wait for the news story like we got from the orphan comment in Portal 2.

 

[Shifty Tortoise]

Wait, these are the same people who that made Dante's Inferno and Dead Space.

Hypocritical much?

No doubt it's been said already, but EA is the publisher, they have little to do with making the game. You should probably edit that first post so you stop getting these replies

OT: It's stupid that they thought it was ok to put this in, in the first place. Let alone leave it in. But it is just a game, not much to get worked up about really, just seems like a joke more than anything else (albeit not a very funny one).

 

[DracoSuave]

You think that's bad? This is a picture of MY Baby.

Spoiler

WELCOME TO SILENT HILL

 

[Wedlock49]

No child has been birthed through me. To the best of my knowledge that is.

 

[The Long Road]

Considering how this is supposed to be a life simulator and that's pretty much exactly how most of society would describe such a child, I'm not surprised one bit that they included this. You can try it yourself. See what people say. I guarantee the word 'wedlock' will come up more often than just about anything else.