Why Are There NO Kids In Sandbox Shooter Games?

[Carlston]

Ive played a lot of sandbox games like all the GTA series and Saints Row 1 & 2 and others.

But I noticed that there are no kids or teenagers in any of the the sandbox shooters.

Well except Fallout 3 but you cant kill or hut the kids. I wonder why, maybe because killing kids or hurting them is morbid.



So What is you opinion?

Why not add puppies...puppies to crush yeah...

People are sicko, and like the 1st postal game, give us kids to shoot and damnit we will.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Why no kids?

Because the adult fodder would get bored of never being the target of my random digital maleficence anymore, that's why.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Simply put and as others said its politics.
I'm also assuming possible difficulties getting through censorship

 

[blankedboy]

What about Black&White? That had plenty of kid-smashing...

WITH HUGE BOULDERS

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Because harming children is humanity's last taboo.

 

[Nomanslander]

What's funny is all those against video games saying it's bad for kids, would probably allow murdering children in video games before they allow softcore sex scenes with nudity.

God I hate my species....-_-

 

[no3]

Well I remember when I was 10 and played fallout for the first time. Imagine my fun, when I visited Shady Sands and killed all the people with an hunter's rifle.
Nevermind.
I guess there's a simple answer to your question and it's: people can't handle moral choices, everything must be restricted by law (like drugs) or don't exist (like this children). People are stupid, so the government kicks in.

 

[ultimateownage]

Well, there was one kid in fallout 3 which sounded like an adult, and you could kill him. I think most people have already said everything else, a little bit of controversy can be good but people find kids too "pure" to kill.

 

[Dramatic Flare]

In the original Fallout Games (one & two) killing kids was not only an option, but was quite common... though this was mostly because at one particular town every time you stepped through a door a pair of little shits pick pocketed you and you had to have some ridiculous level of perception to see it.

Most players simply ignited a bomb with a thirty second fuse and dropped it in one of the kid's inventories. Kaboom, no more kids. You could shoot them, but then the entire town was hostile to you.

Once they even stole a plot piece, and I had to go back four hours of game play to the only save I had where I hadn't gotten and lost it yet.

So, it's only a recent thing that children are mostly invincible. In the glorious days of the late nineties, child killing was a family sport.

 

[SnippyWings]

Well in army of two: the 40th day a kid could potentially die if you made the wrong choice but you dont kill him yourself so im not sure if that counts.

 

[bluemistake2]

because theres a law against killing kids in games?

 

[jamescorck]

Because you are so busy killing people and paying hookers that you don't stop five seconds to try form a family.

Or...

Because you are killing o many people that they don't even dare stepping out of their houses to date, get married and have children.

Actually there's a lot of theories that involve the starting line "because you are killing people..." so don't even get me started XD

 

[Altorin]

Ive played a lot of sandbox games like all the GTA series and Saints Row 1 & 2 and others.

But I noticed that there are no kids or teenagers in any of the the sandbox shooters.

Well except Fallout 3 but you cant kill or hut the kids. I wonder why, maybe because killing kids or hurting them is morbid.

So What is you opinion?

Killing kids is a big nono with the ESRB. It basically redflags a game. Creates a lot of excess controversy for very little benefit.

 

[Michailov]

Ive played a lot of sandbox games like all the GTA series and Saints Row 1 & 2 and others.

But I noticed that there are no kids or teenagers in any of the the sandbox shooters.

Well except Fallout 3 but you cant kill or hut the kids. I wonder why, maybe because killing kids or hurting them is morbid.

So What is you opinion?

Killing kids is a big nono with the ESRB. It basically redflags a game. Creates a lot of excess controversy for very little benefit.

All of mankind are equal, except for everyone.

If it's "a horrible nono to kill kids"
Ok/encouraged/FUN to kill/dismember/burn/stab/shank/roadkill Adults...
What does that say about the elderly?

[I REFER TO EVERYTING INGAME INSIDE A VIRTUAL WORLD WHERE NOONE EXCEPT KIDS GET HURT(EMOTIONALLY).
MICHAILOV IS NOT TO HOLD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DEAD ELDERLY CAUSE OF THIS POST.)

 

[samsonguy920]

I'd as soon avoid games where children were in the line of fire. The game Prey had quite the terrorizing scene where two children were locked in a hold on the alien ship, and you got to witness their bodies explode. Afterward you had to deal with their raging spirits, but that hardly erased the first image from my mind.
I think violent games have broken enough barriers for now. I'm satisfied with what we have to experience.

Besides, I just had the thought that in GTA IV if they sounded different when bouncing off your bumper you could make music just by driving on the sidewalk.

I'm sure other sentient androids share your morbid sense of humor, Xan. Thanks for the chuckle.

 

[Capt. Crankypants]

The Deus Ex games had a few killable kids. One of them had it coming.

Welcome to the Escapist.
Its (relatively) safer here.
Just read the guidelines and follow the rule.
And for the love of everything you hold dear, stay away from the basement.

Hope you will enjoy your time here.

I was never welcomed to the Escapist *sob*, It may have left me mentally scarred and vulnerable =(

Back on topic, well....ergh. It's not as though it's the worst thing that could happen. Fallout 3 you could cannibalise human corpses, not to mention nuking a small community. But, people being naturally thick and ready to cause a big bru-ha-ha over anything edgy (especially children) this'd cop a shitstorm (even if you weren't SUPPOSED to kill them, just being ABLE to would be the trigger).

Dunno, as far as games go, I don't think children are necessary. The can help in games like Fable and The Witcher to increase the appearance of a living community, and putting them into a game is fine by me, but there's really no need to be able to destroy them, and I can't the positives of this outweighing the negatives for the gaming community.

 

[Mozza444]

What you said, it's naughty..

Still i'd love to do it.

 

[serialver]

More on topic: Well the last time I checked killing kids was socially unacceptable

I'm pretty sure killing civilians is socially unacceptable, in general.

Okay you got me there. Let me clarify; Killing children is much, much, much more socially unacceptable.
Killing grown adults who are wasting away is one thing, but killing the future of the world is another.

I disagree with the future of the world nonsense. Kids are cheap and relatively useless. Adults have so many resources spent in education and specialization - it's like killing a level 1 character versus another at level 20. From a rational perspective, if anything, it's less horrible than killing a fully developed adult mind.

It's just that we're culturally and instinctually wired to protect children.

Edit: I'm not sure how I replied to the wrong post. Fixed.

Now that is a dangerous and slightly warped analogy, likening things so heavily to computer game logic.

Society is based on a collective accumulated knowledge, in theory what was learn today is passed onto the young of tomorrow and built upon for an ever increasing knowledge base. Plus, it is not the fact that, as you said a level 20 character has had resources spent upon it and a level 1 has not, it is the prospect and potential which is the future, both are needed, a vessel of knowledge currently and the container to transmit it to.

Frankly many kids have more sense then these taught adults anyway, they have one thing msot adults do not and that is a certain freedom of thought which has yet to be truely weighted down by social demands, expectations and idiosyncratic rubbish.

 

[wfpdk]

i was quite annoyed when i found out i couldn't just slaughter the kids at little lamplight to get past having to talk to them when i was playing an evil character in fallout 3. so i can't honestly say that I'm totally against being able to kill children in games, but i do understand why it's not done. it's bad press. no video game company what's to be know as "that game company that likes to kill children".