I don't like the idea to have a girlfriend/wife that's waiting for you at your house when you return... I'm never in my house anyways. If you got a girlfriend, she could live where she lived before you got together, and you go visit her when you want. But I don't know how much I'd like that either. Sure, there's someone to cook for you, look after your wounds and tell you what she needs when you go out and scavenge, but I'd like more if it was a daughter or a wife of someone that you had a romance with, and because of that she could not leave her home to live with you. Like a Romeo and Juliet or Tristan and Isolde love story. Sneak around with it, don't let anyone see it. And in that case, the father/husband of your lover is also your employer! And if he'll know, he'll try to kill you. The father/husband could be a crime boss aswell, but that's a bit too much like Fallout 2 perhaps? Sleeping with the wife or the daughter of a crime boss?
Well, that was what they did in Fallout 2. You can get married (shotgun wedding, no romance involved), and she (or he if you sleep with her brother) becomes one of your followers/companions. And it was kind of appropriate cause neither of them could fight worth a damn. Your spouse was just a useless hanger-on good for little more than a pack mule. No really, Ian from Fallout 1 was a better fighter, even when equiped with a machine gun!
Ive not played fallout 1 or 2 (being a playstation owner) so i can't comment on these issues compairing fallout 3 to its predessesors. but i do want agree with the comment by mattinthehatt.
"If fox news wants to run a story on how video games are teaching our kids, about six and prosttutes, they might as well also run a story on how porm movies and Playboy magazine are also teaching our kids these things... you know why.. because both of these are made for advltS!.. Fallout is not a kids game. it is designed for advlts that grew up playing video games, and are bored with super mario, and want some real advlt content and action in their gaming."
Gaming has moved on alot over the past few years, but i think some developers are still wary about putting some content into their games in fear of public backlash. After the controversy of games like Manhunt and GTA, violence in computer games has become a norm now, and people are starting to realise that advlts want to play advlt games! But six, on the other hand, is still somthing of a taboo which i still dont get. If you buy an 18 rated movie, you pretty much expect six and violence, so why shouldn't 18 rated games be the same???
There have already been games released that have sixual content in them. I can think of 2 PS2 games that have scenes of six and full frontal nudity that nobody battered an eylid for! (Leisure suit larry, Farenheit)
Im not saying that NV should go down the full frontal nutity or six scene route, but i also dont see why it couldn't either! If game companies are going to make an advlt game and slap a big red "im an advlt game" 18 certificate on the front cover, then they should give gamers an advlt experience!
Ok.
1) Playstation's no excuse these days. They rereleased the first 3 games on one CD and they'll run on pretty much any PC these days. I'm pretty sure you could run it on an iphone at this point. Plus it's worth picking up if you've neverplayed it.
2) I agree with you completely on the censorship issue. The reason this comes up is actually psychological. The easiest way to deeply offend someone is to comment on or challenge the sixual norms of their culture. It's an area where societal beliefs tend to be intense and inflexible. There are also the religious influences brought to us here in the states (Christianity in general, continues to convey certain anti-sixual themes that originated from the apocolypse-ossessive atmosphere that was prevalent at the time of the religion's founding. I'm not trying to offend, only point out that this is a trait common to various chrisitan sects and that there's a completely logical reason for those beliefs to have become part of the religion. I'm not passing judgement here.).
Well, parents feel that while violence is a constant part of our lives, it's influence on their cannot be controled to a great extent (very generalist comment, there are many parents who activly try to protet their children). However as their culture dictates six to be both a shameful and embarassing thing, they feel awkward talking about it with their kids. Meanwhile relieigous figures use the discomfort that rises from challenging these beliefs as a target for concerns regarding major societal changes. It's a target everyone can agree on and that the bible at least says something about (because quotations make things sound more impressive).
So you have that source of unease regarding six. Now throw in a rapidly changing society where, in order to protect children from disease and unplanned pregnancy, people are insisting on teaching children about six in a public setting (school). This takes power away from the parents (thus resulting in anger and frustration) and makes them fear that what they're children are being taught will conflict with their own beliefs. So you have people who claim only parents should teach this stuff to their kids. Now that's nice, but a sizable minority (almost the majority) don't actually tell their kids enough or anything at all, creating chaotic and distressing situations for the children. My point is that in the end, parents loose control over their kids in this area, and become more defensive about the control they have.
Now a game comes out that has sixual content in it. The parents see this or are told about it, often in news reports that exagerate the sixual content, making it appear that it conflicts with their beliefs and values. Rather than expand the mental energy to study the issue (it's being used up working and providing for their families, so there's no time to play a video game or research it to find the truth), an assumption is made based off the information at hand. According to cognitive theory, belief systems are self-perpetuating. Beliefs bias your perception of events, they make it easier to notice certain things. This bias alters how the environment is perceived which then reinforces the belief. IE: if you think sixual content in games is a bad thing, you're more likely to notice articles and stories in the news about how bad sixual content in games are. Likewise you're likely to dismiss or downplay reports that disagree with your beliefs. By noticing those reports that support your belief, it just give more evidence that your beliefs were correct, strengthening the belief.
All in all, what you get is a complex system in which parents try to maintain some aspect of control over their childrens' lives and they use the touchy subject of sixual behavior and beleifs to do this since it's important to them as taught by various cultural influences. As they lack the desire and energy to explore these issues and challenge their own beliefs, they make simple deductions and use those to make decisions. Advertisers and politicians know this (politics and advertising are kind of applied subsets of psychology) and so they use the concept that "core sixual beliefs are being challenged" to drum up instant support and attention. The truth of the matter is not important. What's important is that people think of the politician and immediately associate em with the concept "is outraged by the same things that outrage me", thus increasing the likelyhood of voting for them, or they turn on that news program to see what's going on. The news story might be wrong, but that doesn't matter because the headline or "coming up next" tag got them to turn to that channel which provided advertising revenue.
That's why people get uppity about six in video games. That and if 10 people keep writing letters, calling in and [censored]ing about a topic to a politician, it makes it seem like alot more people are concerned about the issue. All the politician knows is that his office got engulfed in calls and letters all day, complaining about the subject, so obviously it's an important issue.