I understand the advantages of having a game rated T by the ESRB.

However I personally don't think that made much of a difference concerning Oblivion when the ESRB got whiny about the nvde body modification somebody did the game. My fingers are crossed for a more gritty adventure, not entirely grit of course but mature themes tend to give the game a real human look and feel despite it being subject matter people may not find very comfortable.

In order for a game to be a true free form and decision based game, decisions that are otherwise morally perverse have to be allowed to be made.

I doubt I can get an official response concerning the content of the game, but it would be nice to know how the subject matter will compare to oblivion.

Hmm, just dont too gritty. Dragon Age is waayyy to gritty and brutal. That wouldnt really fit into the TES world in my opinion.
But as sad, I hope they are not gonna make it moore kid-friendly.

They already said that it's gonna be more violent than Oblivion (but not over-the-top like Fallout) and Oblivion got an M so I'm guessing Skyrim will be an M.

Dragon Age was not all grit either. But the Grit made you appreciate the beauty the game also had. That being said lets not compare this game to Dragon Age, both are completely different.



Link proof please.

In the Gameinformer http://www.gameinformer.com/b/podcasts/archive/2011/02/03/toddhowardse.aspx Todd Howard says that they are not aiming for a specific rating, but he then goes on to say that it is more violent than Oblivion and that they are expecting M.

Personally I was hoping for the darkest TES so far with dismemberment, killable children and maybe some partial nudity. I don't think we will see any of that though. Maybe some dismemberment if we are lucky.

I think they should just mak the game and get whatever rating they get, not 'go for a rating' (but stay away from a advlts only rating of course)

As said above, it was in the podcast.
http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1164509-edited-transcript-of-the-gi-podcast/ a link to a transcript of that podcast.
Here is the direct text (spoilered because it's long)

Thank you for linking this.

Though as far as kill-able children is concerned, that will probably never happen in a mainstream game. At least not with TES. The last thing Bethesda needs is a segment on Fox News urging people not to support a product because it condones violence on children. Dismemberment would be nice especially with a nice physics engine.

nvm ha

I think the Dragon Age-like splattering of blood on Dovahkiin gives you a good idea of what rating the game will get. BGS doesn't let ratings hold back the kind of image they want to evoke. That's part of the reason why their games are so great to begin with.

Agreed.

That is probably true, it felt super weird to have invincible children in Fallout: New Vegas. Especially when one of them held quest items that you we're forced to buy from him. And another was a member of The Legion, I killed everyone in that camp besides that little kid who kept running around... Screaming...

Between the fiasco with the nvde textures and the more visceral, bloody combat, this is easily getting an M. I think they'd be fooling themselves trying to make it T.

Well they tried for T with Oblivion, and it actually did hold the T rating despite some of the content it held.

The ONLY thing that got it an M rating was somebody making a nvde mod for it.

And a hanging corpse that one of the reviewers missed.

I find that hard to believe concerning there are some rooms with body parts laying around.

I never felt that Dragon Age was too gritty. In fact, while I liked the game, it didn't seem to me that it captured the whole "dark fantasy" thing it was advertised as, it seemed like for the developers, "dark fantasy" translates to "violent fantasy". If you want to see a proper dark fantasy game, the Witcher is more suitable, I think.

But as to what rating Bethesda is going for, they have said that they don't aim for a specific rating, and this, as I see it, is exactly what they should do. Make the game you want, and let ESRB give it whatever rating they feel it deserves. Though in the podcast, Todd Howard said he expects the game to be rated M, and I can believe this. If you watch the trailer, there was a number of scenes with blood in it, and I'm not talking about a spray of red particles like Morrowind had, I mean reletively detailed blood that sprays out and sticks to the player and objects (See for example the part where the character hits the dragon and the resulting blood gets stuck on him. And if anyone is going to tell me "But the dragon fight was scripted!", I won't deny it probably was, but that doesn't mean we won't see blood like that in the actual game. The screenshot that shows the player fighting a troll also shows very similar looking blood on the player's sword, and blood that sticks to objects has been in games for a long time, Oblivion and Fallout 3 had it too, so I see no reason to think the blood in the trailer does not reflect what we'll actually see in the game.) The combat shown in the trailer as a whole also felt more brutal than in past games. From what I've seen, I certainly don't get the feeling of a game intended to get a T rating.

As far as a certain issue related to children people have brought up, I think the fact that the rules don't allow us to discuss the subject on these forums should tell you Bethesda's stance on it, and give a pretty good indication that we won't see it in Skyrim. And because of said rules, I think we should say no more on the subject.



You mean you find it hard to believe that they missed things like that? Well, I'd say that ESRB didn't do their job very well if they missed things like that, but obviously, they couldn't play through the whole game, I don't know the exact proccess by which ESRB determines what kind of content a game has, but I could easily see them missing some details in a game as large as Oblivion.

One? the realms of Oblivion were full of heads on sticks, burned bodies, and Lucien Lachance ended up pretty, shall we say, not suitable for a T rating

It's true. Bethesda told them there was a corpse but it was tucked away in a dark corner, then when there was word of the nvde mod, they reviewed the rating and found the corpse all deformed and in the middle of the room. (remember the graphics were ultra-realistic for 2006).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESRB_re-rating_of_The_Elder_Scrolls_IV:_Oblivion

The only part of Dragon Age i thought was too gritty was the part where i had a bi-sixual 4-way with my witch and elf assassin.

As gritty as it gets

It doesn't matter what rating they make it you cannot police under age children getting their hands on it. GTA anybody ?

You can cut off a draugr's head.
For 2011 that's enough to get the M+ rating, even if he basically doesn't spew any blood (Because he's very cold and veeeery dead)

I'd agree with the OP. Though I don't think you should have to aim for a specific rating, M rated games typically have more freedom. More freedom = more fun, especially in this case.

I don't see what's wrong with a t rating having enjoyed many games that were rated T or lower - I'm wanting hours of immersion and some interesting quests not bucket loads of gore. I'm hoping there will be no f-bombs and no dismemberment apart from skeletons that fall apart - I'd prefer not to have blood drenched walls - which break immersion for me - as I always wonder why it doesn't diminish over time? I didn't think the trailer was particularly gory - but if they finally have some decent clothes for my Breton mage to wear then i don't want them getting blood splattered thanks

It's not about the gore or excessive curse words, at least for me. It's a about making concessions on development. Like if they have a really cool quest, but it contains "mature" themes, they would have to cut it to make a T rating. With an M, it allows them much more freedom to develope.