The Walking Dead: Child Killer (Potential Spoilers)

Vice Gray

First time out of the vault
I remember Fallout being controversial because of the player's option to kill children. From what I remember there were patches and game versions which took out children all together from the game.

This probably the reason why we don't see kid npcs in violent and mature video games.

Than today I stumbled on to an exception to the rule with The Walking Dead Game (not the AMC one but the one that came in episodes by Telltale Games).

The game forces you to make difficult and usually depressing choices that tailor the outcome of future events. One of which is to kill children. I was very surprised when the game gave me the option to pull the trigger on a child in order to prevent him from turning into a walker. My question is what the actually rule of child killing in video games is.
 
they get drunk and throw dices to decide the rating of the game.

At least thats how it feels in Germany.
 
I don't think there's a "rule" one way or the other. But typically publishers will shed their pants over a game getting negative press and/or an "R" rating, both of which might hurt sales, and the people paying the devs' salaries would really don't like that.

[spoiler:aa092e1c42]I guess, with TWD they must've decided the other way, on the grounds that the series has both killing children and children killing (with the caveat that at least one party is or is about to become a walker - so they took a gamble and "stayed true" to the source material in that regards.[/spoiler:aa092e1c42]

And there's always a chance for a favourable dice roll, anyway.
 
Crni Vuk said:
they get drunk and throw dices to decide the rating of the game.

At least thats how it feels in Germany.

Oh, yes. Germany's crazy. Apparently, the elderly men that decide this crap are afraid killing pixels will cause German youth to put on brown shirts and march down streets shattering windows of immigrant businesses, before causing another world war.

Germany: where even the language selection on Wolfenstein's website is disabled, so that your young, impressionable mind isn't hypnotized by a random swastika.
 
well I understand the fear of national socialism considering the history even if I don't agree with all of the decisions (like with Wolfenstein) particularly as they seem not to be about showing swastikas in TV, like Hogans heroes where you see all sorts of SS, Wehrmacht and other German militia running around yet if they even say "Himmler" in Wolfenstein its suddenly a problem ...

But there are other things I don't understand, where certain games get a very positive rating, despite being full of violence, like certain shooters, but a game like Command & Conquer Generals got a lot of flak because it had "suicide units" ... I mean wtf.
 
Like Silencer said, the only thing stopping a game from having child killer is the balance between vision and Profits on the part of the devs and/or Publishers.
 
And believe it or not, there are a lot of people out there in development who find the idea of killing children to be distasteful since they have kids themselves.

I work with kids every day and I don't have a problem with the idea of kids dying in a fictional work. But I have seen the lengths that parents will go to protect their kids and I can understand why they'd be bothered by it.
 
do they think the same when they watch a movie where a child got shoot/killed?

There is a lot of double morale going on.
 
Crni Vuk said:
do they think the same when they watch a movie where a child got shoot/killed?

There is a lot of double morale going on.

The main difference is the player doing it. Fallouts were great because killing children was never necessary but sometimes useful, and the penalties were always severe. You can kill kids in Deus Ex Invisible War but nobody ever mentions it.
 
Also, there's a difference in making the game too.

A person with a kid might not want to put in 30 hours of work making sure that children's jawbones shatter in juuuuuussssttt the right way.

Not to mention that most movies handle the death of children with a bit more tact than video games.
 
seriously guys, I want to say this in the most friendliest way possible because I like yeah, I really do!

But if you believe that, then its so hypocritical ...

games are a form of entertainment, just like movies or books. Why should it get some special treatment? Because of the interaction? Or the way you identify eventually with the protagonist?

Before games became this next popular media and form of entertainment I can remember how a lot of people never became tired of blaming Chucky the killer doll for a boys behavior in Britain where he used to tear the wings from pigeons and skinning cats alive he catched in his neighborhood. And that all because his father had those movies at home which they found when the police looked for the family ... instead of eventually explaining more the situation of the boy in his family. Or how one of my teachers loved to blame porn movies for children/teenagers raping someone, or well the stories he has read about it.

Is it possible that the entertainment we consume can be a part of violence? Of course. A damaged, sick or otherwise easily suggestible mind will eventually take those in a different way then most people. But its usually not the cause of those problems.

If you ask me, games get a lot of attention right now for pretty much the same reason movies did in the past. Because it's easy to make politics with it. It's easy to blame movies, books or games for the most violent situations, because it is very often something you will find with people that enjoy a lot of violence or which simply run amok. But those people also enjoy eventually breed. A stupid example I know, but just to show that it can be a bit more then just "that". People with a huge affiliation to violence will very often seek any form of violence, similar to a drug. This is not a unique kind of behavior for people with issues.

I can see that someone who has a family might have issues with children getting killed or harmed, particularly in a video game. As said. I can understand the feelings a game developer might have with said content, but its hypocritical to have those with games and not feel any problem by watching eventually a movie at home where a child got killed, because its "just a movie". Does it feel better when the protagonist in Grand Theft Auto beats a whore to death or some other random people because they are not children? Why is that not a problem? and I am not one of those guys who is a fan of violence for the sake of violence. But even those exist in other medias, like movies (saw just to name one) and also a lot of comic books and particularly books have seen all sorts of weird content. I don't think that the interaction does play the biggest role here but how we actually feel when we consume it. A book like The Sorrows of Young Werther was for many people so engaging that they committed suicide just like the main character in the book. How many people use the Bible or the Quran to do something that could be explained eventually as a psychotic personality with religious hallucinations?

The death of children, or just the option to kill them, never disturbed me in any way in games. Yes, there is certain content that I don't want to see, like child rape for example, or rape in general. As said, I am not for violence just to "shock" the audience. But there are certainly a lot of movies that get away with this, and its not a problem really for many people, where characters perform actions we don't even question anymore. But as soon you have a game, a "video" game it suddenly becomes a problem. I think to talk about it is a good thing and its important. But I have the feeling that there is a huge double moral going on where people rather want to blame games for issues which they don't cause.
 
One of my old high school buddies, used to love gore and carnage and all of that jazz. About two years back he went and met a girl, they fell in love and had a little girl, cutest little thing too.

Earlier this year, I convinced him to get The Last of Us because I thought he'd really enjoy it.

A few weeks ago, he called me and was getting all angry with me, asking what the fuck was wrong with me and shit.

I asked why he was getting all hostile with me and he goes "Why the fuck didn't you tell me that a fucking kid dies in this?"

He stopped playing at that point (which is really early on) and he's been all angsty with me since.

It might be hypocritical to think more of children than of other people, but it's a damn powerful feeling that a lot of people have.
 
Video games are a more active form of entertainment than movies and books. The emotional impact in seeing a child die in a movie is more often than not less severe than killing a child in a video game yourself.
And being more active makes it harder for some people to draw the line between fiction and reality. Luckily many games are still stuck with very bad writing, but with videogames being a more immersive medium a game with proper writing can really suck you in, letting you build a connection with a fictional character more easily.
I can see how having to kill a child in a game is more traumatizing to some people than seeing a child being killed in a movie (although a friend of mine was even pissed that 'The Hills Have Eyes' had a baby being threatened with a shotgun).
Personally, I think forcing such a cruel choice on the player is brilliant, at least in some games (those that are supposed to have strong emotional impact).
 
generalissimofurioso said:
It might be hypocritical to think more of children than of other people, but it's a damn powerful feeling that a lot of people have.
yes, but I honestly don't understand why its special for video games as long its not just for the sake of violence, where the whole target of the game would be to smash the heads of infants against a wall to use a very exaggerated example.

As far as I see it, just like you said above, it is something that can provoke very strong feelings and emotions and considering the reaction of your friend, I guess the game did its job pretty well with that! Just a thought of course - not everyone might like that of course. I have no clue how it is used in the Last of us, but a lot of reviews about the game seem to be positive and it seems to be a very story driven game.

Killing, or the death of children is in my opinion a tool just like many other things in story telling that has to be used correctly like a kiss between two people or even sex. It can help to create a believable character for example as it does a job in showing a certain attitude and behavior for a character and hence it is also used a lot in movies and books. But as said, it has to be used correctly. Doing it in the right context for example.
 
I am a very friendly prson with children, I basically raised my nephew to the point he thinks of me as a parental figure, my little cousins like spending time with me and in general I have a knack for treating kids. A kid dying in a videogame SHOULD be a shocking thing and should have consequences, it's only a taboo because games are in that age were they have to only be comfortable to whoever is playing always, it's the same reason hard games are almost it's own niche genre.
 
Back
Top