Why Are There NO Kids In Sandbox Shooter Games?

[Sovvolf]

You could kill kids in Fallout 2, but there were consequences for doing it. That said if we had the option to kill kids (I would in a video game because I see most things in a video game as a computer generated model with one's and zero's for brains) the public reaction would be over blown to hell, the game could be banned and it would step borders that I don't think the world is ready to step (yet).

 

[RebelRising]

You answered your own question.

It's very politically incorrect; as such, not even Rockstar and Bethesda would touch it. Very bad politics, even if it's not actually bad business.

black isle did... and no one gave a shit.

But that's because, by and large, no one even gave a shit about games to begin with. Now, videogames are often at the forefront of industry news and media, so it can no longer escape that kind of scrutiny.

 

[The Real Sandman]

Dantes Inferno- killing infants with scythe hands.

You can't really use Dante's Inferno as an example in "child-killing" when the "children" look like this:

THAT is NOT a child. That is a monster! [sub](No change there then, har har har)[/sub]

what about bioshock 1&2 can't you kill kids in those games? Little sisters being 'harvested'

'Zis is twoo. And it would be pretty serious, if wasn't for these three reasons:

1)Just like Dante's Inferno, they're pretty much monsters (I mean Christ, they drink the blood of dead people!).

2)Unlike Dante's Inferno, you don't have to kill them!

3)If you do choose to kill them, you don't see or hear the act, and the game pretty much calls you a **** afterwards.

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

WITH HUGE BOULDERS

Considering that every human being in the game was a minuscule dot with no personality or purpose, and that it wasn't all that popular to begin with, not many people would care.

 

[Plurralbles]

This has probably already been said but Congress passed a law barring such a thing.

IT makes sense and to kill children adds NOTHING to a game anyway.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

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.

I was aware that it was a warped analogy when I made it. It was late, and I was posting in a video game forum. T'was the only analogy I could come up with at the time. I kept it.

The point is, children are cheap: They're easy to make; They're practically a renewable resource. Adults require years and years of development. An adult is socially expensive.

Killing an adult is killing the child they were, and all their years of development, while killing a child is killing, what, 8 years of experience? If killing a child and killing an adult are not equally bad, killing an adult must be worse.

Adults have potential for the future, just as kids do. They also have the potential to have and raise children. They have responsibilities, while children have none.

 

[Sieni]

The game would probably be banned in some countries, and it would just make games receive even more bad reputation from Fox and "worried parents".

 

[Dexiro]

Games already get enough bad rep. Do you really want Atkinson to have more ammo?

Well why not, games have touched everything else why stop now

What would be the point? It's just giving Atkinsons more reasons to drop the banhammer on games.

 

[FolkLikePanda]

Why not make the kids ginger?

Nobody would mind then.

Very harsh but I laughed at this... DON'T JUDGE ME!

 

[Jaranja]

Actually in Saints Row 2 you can make your character look like they're 16.
More on topic: Well the last time I checked killing kids was socially unacceptable, and just shy of totally fucked up.

I think that's a good enough reason.

Killing adults is A-ok!

If there's a 16 year old gang member that's killed people, he should be killed himself. So maybe, put kids in games but only as evil people?

 

[Sethzard]

Ethics, killing children is seen as really taboo, more so than anyone/thing else

 

[RanD00M]

Well the last time I checked killing kids was socially unacceptable

Last time I checked,killing well,anything was socially unacceptable.

OTo you really want Faux news going over every other game because you can kill kids in one of them.No you do not.They take enough stupid shots at video games as it is.We don´t need more.

 

[Sampsa]

You answered your own question.

It's very politically incorrect; as such, not even Rockstar and Bethesda would touch it. Very bad politics, even if it's not actually bad business.

Isn't there child characters in Bethesda's games? Like the grandchampion fanboy in Oblivion and Fallout 3 has its fair share of kids.

Oh btw, I posted without looking if someone else had pointed out the same thing...

 

[Iampringles]

Because aformentioned games often contain violence.

And: violence + kids = big societal no-no.

Well, in games, at least.

 

[Do4600]

Ill murder an NPC adult
not an NPC child.......unless they are annoying

Little Lamplight, anybody?

I hated that part so much, I just wanted to end the conversation, calmly walk away and fire the Fatman at that rickety gate.

In Fallout 2 you could kill children, they were just like every other NPC; of course you never really had a reason to, except Flick's band of thieving bastard children. Then you'd also have the Childkiller trait and practically everybody in the game hated your guts; I think that balanced it out, if you want to kill children the game will treat you like a child murdering prick and hunt you down.

 

[slipknot4]

Something about, "OH THINK OF THE FUCKING CHILDRENZOR!"
I think that it's just to ensure that the game will sell well to younger audiences without having their mothers, in most cases caring about it.
And something about morale and ethics and all that bullshit.

 

[slipknot4]

Ill murder an NPC adult
not an NPC child.......unless they are annoying

Little Lamplight, anybody?

I hated that part so much, I just wanted to end the conversation, calmly walk away and fire the Fatman at that rickety gate.

In Fallout 2 you could kill children, they were just like every other NPC; of course you never really had a reason to, except Flick's band of thieving bastard children. Then you'd also have the Childkiller trait and practically everybody in the game hated your guts; I think that balanced it out, if you want to kill children the game will treat you like a child murdering prick and hunt you down.

http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/fallout-3-child-killer-mod/292091
Here, this will make the game somewhat more livable.

 

[Soviet Steve]

The gamedevelopers already killed every last one of them.