A perk for all the grisly desecrations of the slain that a quasi-psychotic heart could desire. Heads will fly and roll (a thing which no sane mind would ever hope to see in real life, and the sight of which has traumatized many a stout soildier). . . but bare buttocks that everyone has anyway, and that everyone on Earth knows the look of? Nah. That would be innappropriate :facepalm:

How very warped and disturbing. And before anyone starts spouting off about how basic, moderate nudity ( or frankly, in consideration of the new gore options, the lore related brothels and sensualist Religious Temples of Sanguine and Dibella) is superflous and innappropriate, I want you to stop and think about that contrast long and hard. . . a bare bum, versus someone's head being hacked off. Give it some SERIOUS thought, and then come back and give your comments on what is innappropriate, disturbing etc.

And this goes to the moderaters as well. I generally have great respect for our mods, but I cannot help noticing that there is a disproportionate heavy handedness on threads concering nudity etc. etc. but a MUCH more liberal hand towards threads of a violent nature. I know some of that is related to the fact that some forum members have a penchant for going overboard in their comments and being a little too graphic and purile. Nevertheless, it is a disturbing dichotomy.

I don't expect any alterations one way or the other, but I could not in good concience overlook this particular issue. It is interesting to see the devs behave with excessive sanctimony on an innocuous matter while evincing a casual satisfaction over grisly additives.

And for God's sake, don't bother to bring up the fact that the forums are for 13 and older. If you aren't mature enough to know that people have buttocks and to comment rationally on that fact of nature, then you certainly aren't mature enough to have ANY involvement in depictions of or discussions of decapitations. :verymad:

It has more to do with the ratings boards then anything else.

Son, I think it's time we had that talk :sadvaultboy:

This.

Ratings boards have their collective heads shoved up their collective rears when it comes to "moral standards".

This isn't a problem related to Skyrim . . . it's industry wide and it is present in other industries too.

:rofl:

Edit: But anyways, i think nudity is just kind of lame having in a game. I feel like it's a cheap way to get people more interested :shrug:

It's a culture thing in the US. For whatever reason, we seem to think that being nekkid is a big no no, but mutilating your still living form and making you watch your entrails being pulled out and put on display is just fine. I've seen comments from folks in Europe who think just the opposite - that full frontal nudity on both males and females is no big thing, but gratuitous gore and violence is unthinkable.

Since Bethesda is a US corporation, they are beholden to the whims of US law on the issue. Which is also why the ESRB seems to have fits over nudity as well.

It's not necessary, this game does not need nudity to be appealing.

But think of the children!

I completely agree man ... I actually think it's kind of ridiculous to have such gore in TES. In Fallout is one thing, but I felt Elder Scrolls was of a higher class. It's mainly because nudity has rarely been done in a game. All it's going to take is ONE brave title (most likely to be GTA) to incorporate it, and people will start to realize that it's not a big deal.

In film, putting various drugs used to be a definite no no. Then like 5 years ago, they experimented and put it in the 40 year old virgin and people thought it was awesome. Next thing you know there's movies like Pineapple Express and Your Highness .... Granted, there had been other stoner flicks in the past, but now it's more mainstream.

This correlates directly - All it's going to take is one mainstream title to incorporate nudity, and the world will eat it up. Until then, the religious nuts are still in control and the conservative mindset remains supreme.

I wouldn't want nudity for the sake of nudity.
If there was a very plausible, fitting reason for nudity, I'd like it. Just because it's in the lore does not make it fitting. You need to think about the game specific game you're creating and that as a whole; what you really want to achieve, etc.

Ratings have nothing to do with this. Todd said himself before that he doesn't care about ratings when making games. Bethesda make the game the way they want and don't let any ratings box them in.

That's how it works...six is worse than violence and nudity IS six...what a lovely world we live in, when lobbing off people's heads is more appropriate than naked bodies :foodndrink:

It's a social double standard in general. I know most parents will let kids watch violent stuff, but never sixual stuff/porm.

For example - You can show death/violence on TV, but nudity for the most part has to be blurred or not shown at all.



The worst part is , this makes no sense. How is killing people worse than showing the human body, one is pain/suffering the other one is billions of years of evolved perfection :cryvaultboy:

A good game doesn't need nudity to sell. A good game will sell itself.

I'm not going to lie, I really don't care. :confused: I don't see the point of arguing for something so superfluous, violence is in, nudity isn't. Does that really bother you that much? I don't think its a big deal.

Its because nudity adds nothing of value to the game. Plus it would be out of place. In games like GTA it made sense, but not for TES.

But the attitude is great for fostering a population that will perform grisly tasks for the government without reservations and keeping them from growing into too great of numbers to be managed. Controlling attitude toward reproduction allows for easier control of the population overall.

in theory, i completely agree with you.
I see naked people, usually myself, daily. My character would in effect be me, and most NPCs should be mostly clothed.
I don't however, see people being decapitated that often.
But as people have said, an illogical sense of modesty means that to keep acceptable ratings, they can't have nudity.

Well I don't really rely on games for titillation. I'd just rather my character go nvde than be in some advlt diaper. I completely agree with the OP. It's not just nudity that people are complety backwards about either, but six and sixuality in general.

op, thats a long read, can you shorten your points to say two sentences then i can read it, since you mentioned nudity, i am definitely interested.

As said, it's not their decision to make what's ''right''' or ''wrong''.


They just follow the rules laid out before them when it comes to rating.

There's nudity and even six in games (Ballad of Gay Tony) but it bumps up the rating. With the culture wars in America as they are, hard to see the ESRB getting more understanding.

'Murrika

Have you played any of the God of War series?

How about The Witcher 2? (nudity EVERYWHERE in that game, including intercourse all over the place.. you can spend EVERYTHING at a brothel)


I don't care for it really, makes no difference to me.. but you may want to check those titles out.

Except that if they do the kind of thing you're implying, the ESRB slaps it with an AO rating, and bam. No sale. Retailers will NOT carry it, and it's unlikely any digital distributor would either. So that "brave" title would in reality end up being utterly foolish.


This has nothing to to with religion or politics. Plenty of people on both sides of each consider nudity a no-go.


The uncensored version of that would have received an AO rating in the US.