Kyuu said:
Alright, I think discounting every fantastic game with a fixed narrative is, well, not the best idea for a "golden rule." Is that okay? Examples: Every Tim Schafer game ever, tons of adventure/action games, a lot of JRPGs (gasp), the examples given by some other people in the thread, and really every game that isn't a CRPG. Even Mario had a narrative, if a weak one. I'm just saying I don't want to choose between just puzzle games and CRPGs for the rest of my gaming life.
They did. I'll find an article with a quote in it tomorrow when I'm more cogent, or you could easily find one yourself I'm sure. They mentioned there would be non-violent interaction with ghouls, if not super mutants months ago.
Radnan, page 6, and agreed with by maximaz. It's also been stated in at least one other thread. The point of the passage was to show that Bethesda wouldn't be scared at all of childkilling mods, because their reason for taking out childkilling in the first place was they wouldn't be able to release the game, because of the ESRB rating most likely. Bethesda would not be responsible for user-created content like a childkilling mod, thus they wouldn't give a shit and ergo it would not factor into their decision to release the tool kit. You know, if taking him at face value as saying it's a lot of work and they're concentrating on the game first right now is too much to ask.
This is speculative really, because I don't know how well-distributed leveling will be, but let's say there's half of what they say: a solid 50 hour game experience in which you gain your 20 levels. Of course, most likely it'll be exponential experience needed between the levels, but I'm too tired for that right now, so for argument's sake 2.5 hours per level, thus 2.5 hours per perk. In Fallout I was gaining a level about every 30-45 minutes, thus a perk about every 2 hours, assuming I took Gifted. All hypothetical and speculative, but you can see how perks would have to be every level now, because people don't want to wait 8+ hours to get their next perk. That's balance.
And nice job missing the point of what I said. You have no clue how deep Fallout 3's dialogue is, I have no clue, 13pm has no clue. So why bash the developer because he thinks it's deep, and really has the most information on that point right now? Seriously, there are just as easy targets out there. Maybe the nonexistent robot horse hasn't been beaten enough. Robo-beaten!
The point is that America would censor the game. Why add children if you knew they were just going to be removed later? "Because it would show they have balls hur hur hur"? I suppose I would rather have the option to kill children than not have it, but realistically the game just won't get released with it. Games full of gore and violence still manage to get published fine, but those games don't have the graphic dismemberment of children. For christ's sake, I'm on your side. The violence isn't actually more than the previous Fallouts, but it's certainly more noticeable to censors, as it's rendered in the first-person at a higher-def taking up more of your screen. Saying they're not as well done is your opinion, and a questionable one at that. But I do wonder: have there been any big titles in the last one or two years that allowed the player to kill children, aside from BioShock? If anyone could find examples that'd be awesome.
Yes, there are degrees of weirdness, but is killing children something a sane, well-adjusted person would do? I'd find it weird, at the very least, if my best friend decided today was a good day to roll over to the playground and let loose with an uzi.
Ranne said:
Damn, good find. About damn time.
.
