Treading very carefully... does rape have a part in Fallout?

CthuluIsSpy said:
I believe the term is "Chaotic Neutral" :P
And don't tell me you didn't want to punch those brats at little lamplight...or any given child in Skyrim.
Click to expand...

I did! And I 100% agree with you on how much annoying they are. At least in F:NV kids are more-or-less ok, just as they are IRL. They are annoying, but they mostly don't make you want to kill them instantly, as those little bastards in LL did :) From the "maturity" of FO3 (when you do through the dialogs, it looks like they've been written by teenagers) it seems that LL kids are the copies of Beth. staff themselves. It just adds to the desire to kick those arrogant asses. And in Skyrim, everyone is a total asshole, including kids, or is just plain and annoying, like some selected NPCs. The only way to have a real fun from the game would be to play as a kick-ass dragon, who flies around Skyrim and nukes cities from the skies, then lands and finishes survivors.

Though really, I only ever killed 1 kid. It was in Fallout 2, and it was one of those children in the Den who steals all of your money. I did try to steal it back...didn't go well.
Click to expand...

I've tried to play a killing maniac in FO2, started in Klamath. I went on a killing spree, and when a child thrown a rock at me, I've smashed him with a hammer. The kid made some sobbing sound, snapped, slided several meters after the hit, ... well... I've got goosebumps on my neck. I've reloaded the game and decided that a killing maniac is just not my kind of a character.

That's how the game designers should handle such things, IMO: give a player an ability to make any possible choices, without morale implications - and see and feel the consequences of your actions. That would be much more interesting and even educating ("see? harming innocent people ain't cool") than some artificial limitations.
 
I wouldn't say everyone in Skyrim is an asshole, like Aela and maybe Delphine.
But there is way to handle rape in Fallout. If you want to be a total dick, you have a few dialog choices saying or implying you have raped before, or maybe even been raped. Bethesda could even possibly have a choice in background like in Mass Effect 2, where you were a raider, Brotherhood (since they won't let them die), etc.
 
pipboy-x11 said:
That's how the game designers should handle such things, IMO: give a player an ability to make any possible choices, without morale implications - and see and feel the consequences of your actions. That would be much more interesting and even educating ("see? harming innocent people ain't cool") than some artificial limitations.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Decisions should be made by the player, not for the player.
We don't need developers nanny-ing us.
 
Are you people still talking about rape or have you gone off on a tangent to speak only of childkilling? To make a general system and then disallow certain "tasteless" uses of it is arbitrary. To not make a system for doing something else is not arbitrary, it's a design decision, or in this case perhaps more accurately an omission by default.
 
The only reason child killing is censored from most games is that the EU will not allow any game to contain the ability to kill children.... at least that is if I remember Tim Cain's presentation on the making of Fallout correctly.
 
I agree that rape is a part of any potential chaotic environment. That said, when you start making it take place in a game world where the PC does it...that's getting so damn controversial, most dev's wouldn't touch it with a 100ft pole. As for the "rape" in FO2 the dialogue triggering it is NOT clear enough for you to know it's rape until it's too late O.O

I don't blame devs for being hesitant to touch on the rape subject. Look at the hissy-fit parents threw over the GTA series, just because you can run people over, call an ambulance, and then kill the medics....
 
Bethesda's fallout always stunk of PC compliance, and I mean the retarded Censorhappy PC flavore.

Tripping Acid while beating a ghoul with a rusty mallet? Go for it

Dismembering hookers while testing the merchandice from the local slavers? Yeah no problem

Pounding half-a-kilo of Morphine in to my eyeball while raping and then killing a 10 year old girl? Oh Suddenly we're getting OFF MESSAGE.


Point in the whole disturbing tirade - the Wasteland has already gone above and beyond killing children and rape, why the fuck put a red light at a point where the cars already passed the Light two 5 hours ago?
 
Khuzor said:
Bethesda's fallout always stunk of PC compliance, and I mean the retarded Censorhappy PC flavore.

Tripping Acid while beating a ghoul with a rusty mallet? Go for it

Dismembering hookers while testing the merchandice from the local slavers? Yeah no problem

Pounding half-a-kilo of Morphine in to my eyeball while raping and then killing a 10 year old girl? Oh Suddenly we're getting OFF MESSAGE.


Point in the whole disturbing tirade - the Wasteland has already gone above and beyond killing children and rape, why the fuck put a red light at a point where the cars already passed the Light two 5 hours ago?
Click to expand...

Because Parent's Associations are annoying.
 
CthuluIsSpy said:
Because Parent's Associations are annoying.
Click to expand...

Didn't Mortal Kombat lawyers kill them already?

I'll just say what my mother told me when I asked her what rape was:

Rape happens.
 
person said:
CthuluIsSpy said:
Because Parent's Associations are annoying.
Click to expand...

Didn't Mortal Kombat lawyers kill them already?

I'll just say what my mother told me when I asked her what rape was:

Rape happens.
Click to expand...

Nope. There will always be some organization out there who will go on a morale crusade against anything that pisses them off. The sad irony is that the free-speech laws or whatever allows them to do this, which ultimately results in the censorship of games and movies.
 
Token-not-found said:
WillisPDunlevey said:
Single much?
Click to expand...

If you are a woman that comment reflects badly on you.

The double standards are there for a reason - loyalty is arguably the most important quality in a woman, no matter the shape and size- from a rational and evolutionary point of view.

Loyalty is viewed by women (in a man) at worst as a commodity and at best valuable.

For women it's quintessential , for obvious reasons, the most important one being the legitimacy of the offspring.

No sane or rational man will marry you knowing the risk of losing his life thanks to the privilege women have in the courtroom and knowing the average women's lack of loyality and the staggering rates of divorce.

I'm not saying things were better before, women only appeared more loyal , less whorish because they did it out of sight because it was not allowed and were financially dependent on the man.

Maybe it's better to have things in plain sight now , in the past people were just more hypocritical and careful about it, not more loyal i think.

Anyway i have more respect for prostitutes than for the average woman. At least prostitutes are honest about it and upfront.

Don't know about you guys, but i'd rather not fall in the trap of a woman with more mileage on board that Al Bundy's old dodge that senses losing her youth and looks and quickly tries to sucker a poor fool into marriage while fucking the bad boy on the side and getting the alimony check after that, and maybe raising his kid with it.

I get the women, it's in their best interest to be feminist , what i don't get are the manginas who defend their parasitic and hedonistic ways. I mean that's won't get you laid 99% of the time and it ruins your chances at a decent women, because white knights are usually loyal and not hustlers.

So you are practically helping a half-whore become a full fledged whore and losing your self-respect in the process.
Click to expand...


This thread just got raped.
 
Token-not-found said:
WillisPDunlevey said:
Single much?
Click to expand...

If you are a woman that comment reflects badly on you.
Click to expand...

Ha! Ha! This obvious troll is quite obvious.

As for Fallout it's a simple truth . . . if there's going to be a degree of plausibility, rape is going to happen. When you visit bordellos in-game, they're never very well protected, which is true, and that doesn't bother me because it's realistic. If someone enters a whorehouse in that world, then they're definitely willing to pay. If you're the violent type at all, there's "ripe picking" out there: easy prey.

Yeah it's sad but . . . there's no avoiding rape in a world where cannibalism becomes a resourceful manner of living.
 
FOvet said:
I'm not even going to dignify that damned post with the response I *want* to give it. All I'll say is that is part of the reason this world is so fucked up.
Click to expand...
I guess I'll do you the favor.

I wouldn't call this responding TO that malignant gibberish, as much as that I'm addressing the topic, and if HE has any sense, he'd listen to what I have to say, and learn from it (but I'm not holding my breath).

Yes, there's "room" for rape, in Fallout. But it's a very touchy subject, so that's something that, like the "Cut Whore" quest in FO2, really ought to be done in an indirect fashion (i.e. DON'T make it an option for the player). The argument could be made that we all want the modern games to have the option for killing children, so where's the line between that and rape, and why can't the PC be allowed to rape?

The difference is simple: You can kill accidentally. Rape is ALWAYS intentional.

Rape isn't a sexual act; it's psychological. Rapists aren't gentile but lonely lovers who use women because they can't find a girlfriend, or they're "misled by porn" (an old, absurd argument feminists like to use); they're predators, through and through. When someone rapes, it's an act that they knowingly perpetuate that does HARM to the victim. Women aren't the only victims of rape, but they're NOT necessarily "capable" of committing rape, themselves (in a certain sense). When you're raped, your freedom is absolutely taken away from you, and you suffer through an excruciating experience that haunts you for as many years as it takes you to struggle with it. It has similar psychological consequences to being mugged, only the pain is much, MUCH deeper and more personal. People who get raped aren't being "pandered to" and they aren't "making a big deal of it", it really IS a traumatizing experience. By contrast, when you die, that's it. If you believe in an afterlife, you move on from your death, and if you don't, there's no reflecting upon how you died. With rape, you're always left with some kind of reminder that sticks with you while you live.

Violence and rape are very much akin to one another, so it's absolutely acceptable to point out that if there's one in a game then why not the other? But people don't make the distinction between "violence" and "killing"; they think they're one and the same when they're not. Violence doesn't imply murder or death, although they certainly can come as a consequence of it, just some kind of abusive act that harms another human being. Just like rape, it can traumatize those who have been subjected to violence and lived through it. But again, the difference is the level of intimacy that goes with it. While violence is also deliberate, it's not NEARLY as personal as rape.

Men can be raped, just as women can, but on a general, physical sense, men are far less likely to be targeted, simply because women are typically much weaker. Being easier to take advantage of is what causes ALL miscreants to target their prey for whatever they have in store. Those who look like they can defend themselves are generally left alone, so fewer men are targeted than women. It still happens to both.

In short, there's reasons for everything. Our world around us is governed by facts and realities, and just because SOME people have worthless, petty opinions, that doesn't mean those opinions are worth a damned thing in the world. Your opinion doesn't decide if a rape victim is suffering severe mental anguish, that's a matter of fact.
 
would it be a general option or part of a perk?like sandman ?
/
*sneak {Pickpocket}
{Murder}
{Rape}

while i think rape is a form of maiming someone , why not have that as an option to resolve conflict, or for that matter torture , person with high::
perception(aim for favored hand)/
medicine(stops bleeding, saves life of victim)/
strength(ability to chop)/
agility(accuracy to do precision work)
---- can chose a perk that allows them to maim/torture/threaten NPC's giving other dialogue options

I error on the side of letting the player decide, would never happen though, it would have to be a mod.

It could be used as a viable mechanic for resolving quests, dress as one tribe/faction and rape/mutilate another tribe/faction to start warring.

Also could use a stacking reputation to give PC a feared/hated welcome by most civilized people and earn the good graces/fear of raiders.

Also pedophilia is implied in 3 when talking to Eulogy about the lamplight kids quest.
 
Ahem...rape in game...

As Per pointed out, there was in incident in Modoc that was attempted *seduction* (not rape) but if you didnt pass the skill check was then "implyed rape" with (humorous)consequences (and could have been boy-girl/ boy-boy/ girl-girl)

What I think would have been more in the line of "rape" would be the scenario if you lost the arm wrestling match with Francis in Broken Hills
 
I think dialogue is good enough. Personally I don't need to actually SEE it happen, and most people don't want/need to. I wrote a fanfic some years back where Amata gets raped and it felt enough to me to just say "he raped me" while telling the LW about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top