Fallout 3 and Game Violence's Taboo

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Emil Pagliarulo explains his views on mature-rated gaming in an op-ed piece for Edge Online.<blockquote>Fallout 3 is an M-rated game—made for adults. Its violence is over-the-top and has been a central focus of not only our game, but the entire franchise. This is a series that in previous installments allowed players to kill children, right? When Bethesda first started developing Fallout 3, we had early conversations about whether you’re going to be able to blow the kids’ heads off . (Let’s be clear, with the ESRB’s rating system, that’s not something that would fly anyway.)

But then we began to think, really what benefit would there be in killing the kids in the game? It just seems gratuitous, unnecessary and cruel. The reverse of that is some of the great stories that have been told that involve kids. Look at George R. R. Martin’s Song of Ice and Fire books. Kids play an important part in that series, and violence to those kids is an important part of those stories.

You really have to balance out and consider if doing violence to a child in a game is so important to your story that it outweighs any kind of social responsibility you might have.</blockquote>
 
Oh please "Social responsibility"? Yet you're showing flying eyeballs, severed limbs, etc?

I hadn't realized Bethsoft was the social guardian of the gaming industry.

:roll:
 
Emil said:
Its violence is over-the-top and has been a central focus of not only our game, but the entire franchise.
Click to expand...

:clap: On still not grasping that Fallout was not about Bloody mess. :wall: Douchebag.

Social responsibility my ass, they just didn't want people's mommies to not buy the game for their thirteen year old's because you can off a kid. I remember killing a couple of kids accidentally on my Fallout run through. It completely turned everyone against me, just like it should be. I don't know if there were many people that killed children on purpose...
 
Makes you wonder if there are such things as 'Emil - Goggles' like the Simpsons 'Beer - Goggles'.

"See the world through the eyes of Emil."
 
<blockquote>You really have to balance out and consider if doing violence to a child in a game is so important to your story that it outweighs any kind of social responsibility you might have.</blockquote>
Click to expand...
By social responsibility he means letting the alien filth dictate what we can play, yes?
Honestly, reading such treacherous words makes me sick.

Anyway, even if there's such a thing as a "social responsibility", such a blatant discrimination against adult characters is disgusting, really disgusting.
Especially, that IIRC one of them talked about how senseless brutal murder of elderly people is fun...
 
I'm trying real hard not to let my brain run to wild conclusions about the inane nature of this.

But he's essentially contradicting himself entirely with this article.

All violence is unnecessary, gratuitous and cruel.

Having it happen to children shows that the world doesn't magically change the rules just because you haven't been around as long as your parents.
 
As a non-Amerikaner / semi-non-Europeaner i am a bit confused right now. Showing stupid things like Excessive Gore, Blood, Police takedowns, violence to kids is not a big problem. Cursing and cussing is ok as long as it is done in a foreign accent like a southern american or a brit or oxford english or maybe new englander... And lastly showing nipples (one of the first objects you see in your life along with some strange faces, some hands and your own fingers) means: OMG you are poisoning our global culture!!.... I thought i was the only one here that is living in a country that is sliding back to medieval times....
 
I totally killed kids on purpose in Fallout 1/2.
Those bloody mess kills? Awesome.
That 'childkiller' title? Awesome.

If I can't do it in videogames anymore, I don't know where I will be able to vent my child-killing tendencies... :-/
 
cronicler said:
(other words here) ~ I thought i was the only one here that is living in a country that is sliding back to medieval times....
Click to expand...

Im pretty sure that during medieval times 'squires' (children assuming a role of assistance to a fighter, ageing anywhere from 9 or 10 years of age) would commonly see combat, and often be chopped into small parts by persons that didn't much like the way they stood. and lets not forget that a 'fighter' (knight / crusader / whatever) could easily begin their long career of people up-chopping at the onset of manhood (or about 13 years of age, depends where ya' look for info) sooooo... child violence. it's bad mmm-kay.

to surmise, no, its not going 'back' to medieval times, as that would mean MOAR violence toward the young'ns. now, pass me a bozar them damn thieving brats in The Den are about to taste some wasteland happy pills that are shaped just like bullets.
 
what benefit would there be in killing the kids in the game? It just seems gratuitous, unnecessary and cruel.
Click to expand...

What an hypocrit...Because killing beggars asking you for water isn't, right ? Nuking an entire town off the map so you can have your own room in a shitty hotel isn't, right ? How is killing an adult any less cruel ?

And so what if it is ? It's a friggin game. Gratuitous, unnecessary and cruel violence is fun. Did you ever hear about Carmageddon or Postal ? When was the last time your company ever did something really subversive ? Can you even remember ?

If I were a game developper, I would totally develop something like "Stanton High : a school massacre" just to piss people off.
 
Honestly, I would have respected the answer better if it was along the line of: "We left kids out of the game because it would really mess with getting an M from ESRB or being banned from certain advocacy groups" or something like that.
 
You know, as much as I like seeing you guys take potshots at Emil again, his whole argument is superfluous anyway, because of one point he names:

Let’s be clear, with the ESRB’s rating system, that’s not something that would fly anyway
Click to expand...

Simply put: with killeable kids, they would practically not be allowed to sell the game in the United States. This is true for Bethesda as it is for everyone. That's exactly why child-killing was never a bone of contention, even here it never really was because even we're not rabid enough to think Bethesda should just give up on selling the game so we can have mortal children in there.

Make fun of the decision all you want, but it was never an option. Which makes this whole op-ed piece kind of inane.
 
That's why I became extremely xenophobic. I believe that there are no chances for peaceful coexistence with aliens.
 
I know that they've made the only decision possible if they wanted to release their game. I still think it's pretty hypocritical from him to say that they really thought about the possibility but came to the conclusion that it was unnecessary, cruel and gratuitous. It's not true. I even bet that they didn't even think of it in terms of how it would feel in the game.

As you said BN, it never was an option to begin with...
 
Emil, the guardian of society :salute:

Sigh... It would be refreshing if he just said "We couldn't include child-killing because we won't be able to sell it in NA". That simple.
 
Elhoim said:
Emil, the guardian of society :salute:

Sigh... It would be refreshing if he just said "We couldn't include child-killing because we won't be able to sell it in NA". That simple.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, simple doesn't sell the game.
 
Either don't have kids or don't let townspeople be attackable. Having things being unkillable just because they are short is a mess.
 
They could have just not allowed you to kill the children in their "totally new and original" slow-motion style. Being from the U.S. myself, I think that as long as the violence against children wasn't gratuitous, then it would be fine. They should have just turned down the violence level in general, which is mostly pointless and goofy looking anyway. I'm pretty sure if Rockstar Games had made Fallout 3, you would see killable children and an M rating from the ESRB. I completely disagree with Emil in this case and I think they were just hoping to be able to sell to young teenagers and cater to the lowest common denominator without stepping on TOO many toes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top