screw you soccer moms! : V - Skyrim

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:51 am

I can see why they won't let the player kill children, (well duh!)

But getting hit by dragonfire has nothing to do with player choise, maturity/inmaturiy, child abuse
The kid had an accident! no player intention to do so, aka for immersion sake it should be dead.

but then again this is a game and yadayada, so I understand :S

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:33 am

honestly, there are hundreds of things they should do to make the game more realistic before they allow you to kill children.

the balance issue, horses not moving like horses, add more dialogue options so you can act like the character you're playing,
making you actually have to sleep, the innkeeper dying from insomnia and exhaustion, making you have to eat,
allowing you to decorate a table in less than a week.

hell, even being able to plow your significant other after some alto wine and skooma....

why is not being able to kill children so important to you? :S

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:03 am

Actually, as far as brain signals and physiological responses are concerned, they are distressingly closer than you think... :whisper:

Source?

why is not being able to kill children so important to you? :S

It's mostly because of their crappy AI. Even with a Dragon around they don't even take proper cover or run into a house. It's just annoying to see a kid run into the middle of a dragon breathing fire...
Besides, it's not you killing children, it's children dying. I don't think anyone would want to kill a kid.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:03 am

Anyone who wants kids to die in a video game needs to have his head checked.

Need a bandage for that bleeding heart of yours bud? I mean you do know the first 2 fallout games not only allowed you to kill children but gave you a special title for doing so?

YES! i know fallout 1 &2 were not made by bethesda

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:49 am

Killing a young person is wrong but an old person is ok? This is basicly saying children are worth more.

they are cause they're cute! once theyre 12 and older they become mean ugly bastards like all the others...

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:39 am

Look like someone gonna get suspended or worst like i did, better becareful guys lol.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:35 am

Anyone who wants kids to die in a video game needs to have his head checked.

But it's ok to decapitate an advlt right?

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:43 am

the only exception here could be babette tough...she's a special child

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 8:53 pm

For now, Beth needs to focus on making advlts killable. Seems like most are not sometimes.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:20 am

...Then answer me this; why in the world would they just, you know, not include children? I couldn't give less of a crap if kids weren't around, but if you know that kids are going to be unkillable, and if you know that they're going to get attacked by other NPCs and dragons and stuff. then why would you put them in the game?

Because children have always been a part of elderscrolls series. It also makes towns feel more submersive.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:37 am

For now, Beth needs to focus on making advlts killable. Seems like most are not sometimes.

I'd rather they improve AI first, so any unkillable NPC isn't a freaking eyesore.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:11 am

I don't play games to kill virtual children, but when they get caught in the line of fire and walk away unscathed, it just kinda doesn't work ya know.

Remove them from the game or do it right.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:00 pm

im just sratrting to think some real nasty thoughts bethesda coud have put in for a few chuckles.

whole town gets oblerated by dragons and other creatures, dead bodies everywhere but the chidren are walking around without a scratch. then suddenly you hear "WHY COULDN'T IT HAVE BEEN ME!!??" then, "BECAUSE YOU'RE A GOD!!"

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:35 pm

But really, its not a major issue...

in Skyrim, when dragons spit fire on a house, does it burn? because if not, then this kills immersion too... where would that stop?

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:33 am

It really is annoying to have a little village raided by a dragon and end up with nothing but the kids left.

The people who are against it need to look at it from a different perspective, if a village filled with immortal children gets attacked by a dragon, you don't really care because the kids can't die anyway. If they COULD, you would have a completely new reason for defeating that dragon, because you need to save those poor little children, right?

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:40 pm

For now, Beth needs to focus on making advlts killable. Seems like most are not sometimes.

hehe... thats a really good point. unkillable children doesnt seem quite so bad when half the advlts are immortal as well.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:32 pm

We don't need child murder simulators. I would prefer that no children be in the game, then some jacked up gammer going on a child murdering spree. Anyone who think virtual child murder is ok, is probably approaching murdering actual children. There is a line and killing kids is a gigantic leap over that line.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:30 am

Anyone who think virtual child murder is ok, is probably approaching murdering actual children.

That makes perfect sense.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:06 pm

We don't need child murder simulators. I would prefer that no children be in the game, then some jacked up gammer going on a child murdering spree. Anyone who think virtual child murder is ok, is probably approaching murdering actual children. There is a line and killing kids is a gigantic leap over that line.

I agree. Beth, please remove kids and beheading and other violent visual and audio stimulations.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:23 am

Source?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16585487, for example. Or http://www.public.iastate.edu/~nscentral/news/2006/jul/desensitized.shtml. http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~pida/phasic%20emotional%20reactions%20to%20video%20game%20events%20-%20a%20psychophysiological%20investigation.pdf one too, though I'd like to have the cliff notes version. Just google the thing and you'll get a bunch of valid results.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:57 am

[censored] political correctness.

Art should imitate life, not censor itself for the justification of a few feeble minded individuals who do not understand what art is or how the real world works.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:26 am

We don't need child murder simulators. I would prefer that no children be in the game, then some jacked up gammer going on a child murdering spree. Anyone who think virtual child murder is ok, is probably approaching murdering actual children. There is a line and killing kids is a gigantic leap over that line.

I'm not into it either, but tell me, how does someone else "single player" experience effect you?

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:56 am

[censored] political correctness.

Art should imitate life, not censor itself for the justification of a few feeble minded individuals who do not understand what art is or how the real world works.

There's only one problem...

Video games aren't art.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:55 am

Well, houses dont burn down when hit by dragonfire, neither do Trees.
limps dont fall of when hit, neither does furniture.
You can drink cubicleters of potions while the world stops.
Various people are immortal, so are kids.
Dont really see how that would be a problem.
Games arent realistic.

» Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:43 am

There's only one problem...

Video games aren't art.

The Smithsonian and two or three decades of graphic artists and script writers disagree with your statement.