From: Gambling, six and other human vices

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:51 am

I am trying to figure out if people care about Fallout having real human nature with real human vices being in future games? Do the fallout fans wish that F3 and future games would go back to having that stuff back in the fallout universe? I know Bethesda has a reputation to protect along with their distributors and Laws are different from country to country but come on. Fallout is a M rated series well it used to. I am not talking about making any advlt game with hardcoe stuff in it but as a fallout fan a big fallout fan I feel bethesda has taken it down the wrong road. Who is with me? are there Fallout fans out there? I am not trying to offend anyone I am thankful to Bethesda, fallout would be history if they did not take it up but they are not thinking like a fallout fan.


"Nothing against mods but why sould we wait to have mods made with what should already be in the game?"
User avatar
vanuza
 
Posts: 3522
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:14 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:32 am

Because this is America, and some stupid judge or something would have the game pulled from the shelves, and Bethesda would be looked at like the "bad guy". I suppose it could be worse. Australia is always getting games yanked because of content that is half as appropriate as even we get. Too bad they couldn't have a "regular version" and an "advlt version".
User avatar
Rachel Tyson
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:42 pm

Post » Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:33 pm

Personally, I don't care one way or the other.

But in the US (as well as the world at large,) games are still viewed as kids stuff. That means six/nudity is a no-no. Unless you live in, say Germany, at which point nudity is fine, but you'd better not have violence!
User avatar
Latisha Fry
 
Posts: 3399
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:42 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:04 am

Well, in the first two Fallout games there was gambling (It was a skill for *beep* sake) and six (offscreen, of course). I guess it's not as easy to "get away" with that stuff now that game graphics are so photorealistic.
User avatar
JD FROM HELL
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:54 am

Post » Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:32 pm

Well, in the first two Fallout games there was gambling (It was a skill for *beep* sake) and six (offscreen, of course). I guess it's not as easy to "get away" with that stuff now that game graphics are so photorealistic.

I agree and as for six they can still have the six off screen. In fallout 3 the closest they come to six is paying Nova to sleep next to you. That is not even sixual at least it is not to me.
User avatar
SUck MYdIck
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:43 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 2:08 am

Yeah I want it back! At least if they implement these things within the boundaries of what is considered good taste. The first two Fallout games did that and I feel it is part of the Fallout universe. Maybe politicians still see gaming as kids stuff, but that doesn't explain why they would allow graphic violence with exploding heads and blood all over the place, but not gambling and six/nudity. I mean come on, six is a very normal thing, anybody ever walked around a corner getting sprayed by bullets and everyone's head flying off around you? The game is already meant for a more advlt audience and I don't think they are influenced in any way at all if there is graphic violence, six/nudity or gambling in the game. If anything, six and gambling is much more a part of everyday life than violence (life or death situations at least).
User avatar
Scared humanity
 
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:41 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 4:40 am

So far, the results speak for themselves. Resounding "YES" votes. Very happy to see this.

I can never understnd when people buy 18-rated games and then complain about violence/six/vulgarity

As far I'm concerned, they should all get Nintendo DSs and play cookery games!

Good poll. :celebration:
User avatar
Mandi Norton
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:43 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:55 pm

I've no desire for six in my game. If I want six, I shall go upstairs.
User avatar
R.I.p MOmmy
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:40 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:46 pm

I don't think vices are a necessity; the original Fallout had only one possible sixual encounter for the Vault Dweller, and no gambling. I don't remember any drug addicts either, and Fallout is generally considered to be the installment with the best post apocalyptic atmosphere. Certainly prosttutes and drug addicts on every street corner would help generate an atmosphere of despair (which was one of the few saving graces of New Reno in Fallout 2), but are they really necessary? I think there's more important things to worry about for future installments.
User avatar
Breautiful
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:51 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:57 am

I've no desire for six in my game. If I want six, I shall go upstairs.


Yes.

I voted that I don't care on both issues. I don't see either as critical components for Fallout.
User avatar
Mike Plumley
 
Posts: 3392
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:45 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:58 am

Would I like to have it ? Yep.

Would I buy the game just for it ? Erm... no.
User avatar
Isabell Hoffmann
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:34 pm

Post » Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:39 pm

its not really important gameplay wise, but I would still like to have it, could be a mod or something
User avatar
Bryanna Vacchiano
 
Posts: 3425
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:54 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:27 am

six treated in an psychological and social context yes. pormographic no.
User avatar
sam westover
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:00 pm

Post » Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:34 pm

I've no desire for six in my game. If I want six, I shall go upstairs.



Sorry.....but that's hot!! :cookie:
User avatar
Jon O
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:48 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:04 am

six treated in an psychological and social context yes. pormographic no.

I agree with that, Bethesda would have a hard time if the game had graphic pormographic content in it. But what was wrong with the "golden globes" and having tryouts? and the "cat's paw" what was wrong with that? They could help your character with their states.
User avatar
Shelby McDonald
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:29 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:29 am

I agree with that, Bethesda would have a hard time if the game had graphic pormographic content in it. But what was wrong with the "golden globes" and having tryouts? and the "cat's paw" what was wrong with that? They could help your character with their states.

I think a few suggestive words and a fade to black is quite appropriate for a fallout game. As for Gambiling, to Paraphrase the fallout 1 Manual: After the apocolyse, when we're just down to one can of food, you just know someone is going to bet it on a coackroach race.
User avatar
Markie Mark
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:24 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 2:36 pm

They were in fallout 1&2 (afaik) and were taken out of fallout 3 because beth apparently has problems with these things. I, however, feel that to not have these subjects in this kind of game is very unrealistic, and by removing it, you are removing things that make the game more realistic. It should definitely be included in any fallout games ever made in the future.

I realize that including these themes will exclude the lower aged people (who shouldn't be playing anyway) from being able to purchase it.. but like I said.. they shouldn't have it to play in the first place. Not to mention, the age group buying this is familiar with the "controversial" themes presented anyway. I guess it's an "image" thing.

Anyyyway, I'd really like to see it included, but it doesn't have to be. Anything they don't include off the bat could just be modded, I suppose.
User avatar
Jack Bryan
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:31 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 4:15 am

Nothing against mods but why sould we wait to have mods made with what should already be in the game? Not everyone will have the same mods so people will get different Ideas of what Fallout should be, this will divide fallout fans. We need to bring people under one Umbrella of Fallout goodness. We can do that by having Bethesda make future games the way Black Isle did by the poll people what that content in the games.
User avatar
Nana Samboy
 
Posts: 3424
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 4:29 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:14 am

Plus, mods are only available to pc users
User avatar
stephanie eastwood
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:25 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 2:44 am

Nothing against mods but why sould we wait to have mods made with what should already be in the game? Not everyone will have the same mods so people will get different Ideas of what Fallout should be, this will divide fallout fans. We need to bring people under one Umbrella of Fallout goodness. We can do that by having Bethesda make future games the way Black Isle did by the poll people what that content in the games.


Actually... :grad:

Bethesda is in a Precarious place, in terms of FO fans... if they attempt to change it, hardcoe FO fans will yell at them for moving away from the universe, if they change nothing, hardcoe FO fans will yell at them for not adding anything to the universe.

It all boils down to the fact that you can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time. You're lucky if you can please 80% of the fans 60% of the time. Not every idea that a fan likes can be placed into the game, and this is the exact reason Bethesda released the modding programs like the GECK for it's games. The blatant mod support is Bethesda's way of saying "If you don't like what we have in it, or if you want something in the game we missed, feel free to add/remove it!"

Mods won't divide FO fans, they actually unite them (in fact, I'm partially convinced that the amount of repair mods that add junk to the repair list is why Bethesda added in the Alien Epoxy in MZ.) The only people who lose out on mods are Console Gamers, and it's because the makers of said consoles don't like 3rd-party content on their systems. It's possible to hack your Console to get mods, but it voids whatever warrenty on the console you have (and I think it may even be illegal for some odd reason...)
User avatar
Daniel Brown
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 11:21 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 2:11 am

Actually... :grad:

Bethesda is in a Precarious place, in terms of FO fans... if they attempt to change it, hardcoe FO fans will yell at them for moving away from the universe, if they change nothing, hardcoe FO fans will yell at them for not adding anything to the universe.

It all boils down to the fact that you can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time. You're lucky if you can please 80% of the fans 60% of the time. Not every idea that a fan likes can be placed into the game, and this is the exact reason Bethesda released the modding programs like the GECK for it's games. The blatant mod support is Bethesda's way of saying "If you don't like what we have in it, or if you want something in the game we missed, feel free to add/remove it!"

Mods won't divide FO fans, they actually unite them (in fact, I'm partially convinced that the amount of repair mods that add junk to the repair list is why Bethesda added in the Alien Epoxy in MZ.) The only people who lose out on mods are Console Gamers, and it's because the makers of said consoles don't like 3rd-party content on their systems. It's possible to hack your Console to get mods, but it voids whatever warrenty on the console you have (and I think it may even be illegal for some odd reason...)

Well I am a Big Fan of the Fallout Universe and there is little in Fallout 3 that pleased me when it comes to feeling like it belongs in the Fallout Universe, very little. I feel like they did not even try to please Fallout fans. and again not everyone will have the same mod, it was a good thing Bethesda added mod making to their stuff but it feels like a cop-out away to avoid upsetting retailers and publishers with the kinda content that used to be in fallout games. Bethesda needs to ask themselves "what would black isle studios have done?"
User avatar
Soku Nyorah
 
Posts: 3413
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:25 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:25 am

Bethesda revived a game series that was a decade old.

I don't think it really occured to them that FO would still have rabid fans after 10+ years of inactivity, with games that progressively got worse as development went on (FO->FO2->FO:Tactics-> FO:BoS [kills the series].) While they did make the attempt to keep it in line with the universe, they assumed (wrongly, it seems) that the FO fans would be at least appreciative of having an updated version of Fallout after the horrid mistakes since FO2. Instead, the FO community is divided into "it's OK" and ... well, I can't say what their opinion is in polite company.

And let's be honest... if Bethesda didn't use the modding program and developed FO3 with all the vices of the previous game, do you think it would've sold as well with a big "advlts-Only" Raiting plastered on the front of the game box? Especially since such games tend to spark a flood of angry letters to politicians?
User avatar
jesse villaneda
 
Posts: 3359
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 1:37 pm

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:14 am

I posted this in another thread a while back:

I was actually surprised by the lack of it. I would have thought the post-apocalyptic world would have been filled with brothels, shady strip joints and a abundance of prosttutes. six sells and running a place like this in the wasteland would earn you a whole lotta caps. I think it could have added to the general theme if it was implemented right. I'm not saying there should be XXX scenes in the game or anything mind you, but in most apocalyptic fiction you find this sort of thing so I was kinda expecting it. I really didn't care that there wasn't any, but I thought that the little there was, was implemented poorly. I mean I can splatter the brain matter of an old lady all over the wall and rob her corpse, in a apocalyptic wasteland with no strip joints or ladies of the night trying to get as many caps from me as possible. I guess its down to not being able to be sold in some countries which are small-minded when it comes to sixuallity yet have little problem with blowing peoples faces off..

However, before everyone starts calling me a perv, I'd just like to say that I wasn't bothered by the lack of sixuallity at all. I just kinda expected to see it in the game, and if it was there, and implemented properly, I think could have helped sell the overall apocalyptic feel of the game.

We are starting to see nudity in games now, and to be honest, I really don't have a problem with it if its done right, just like film and TV, games that are for advlts, should be able to contain similar content to Film and TV. For me, not many games need or would be helped by have sixual scenes, however, it could have worked for Fallout.

User avatar
kirsty williams
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:56 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:27 am

The bottom line to me is that Fallout 3 did not need to have six and gambling in it to become the #1 game of the year, and a fantastic game overall. The game was able to provide plenty of immersion and was able to achieve the wasteland feeling without having six and gambling in it, and as such I definitely think they are Not necessary.

Bethesda also avoids a ton of hassle by leaving that stuff out, as it avoids potential conflicts and backlash from having smut in the game - even if it made sense to have in there, its not worth the trouble. Games are not like TV in that smut on TV is a passive absorption of content, where games are interactive - parents have a very different reaction to passive content versus something more active in that regard (at least thats how I feel about my 13 year old daughter when I consider it).

Sure it would be more "realistic", but realism is not what made Fallout 3 the #1 game. Everything Else they put into it made it so, and I don't suspect Bethesda will change their view on it any time soon.

Miax
User avatar
teeny
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:51 am

Post » Thu Oct 21, 2010 2:16 pm

Well no offence but 13 year olds should not be playing M rated games it's 17 and up at least in Canada. If the other fallouts had that kinda content then why not fallout 3 and future games? It was done once it can be done again. It's that kinda thinking that makes people pass dumb laws like some countries have were blood has to be any colour but red and other bs laws. Anyone under 17 stay away from M rated.
User avatar
Steven Nicholson
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:24 pm

Next

Return to Fallout Series Discussion