Do you think you should be allowed to kill kids in games?

[BishopofAges]

I honestly do not care enough about kids as characters unless they are a real deep part of the storyline or quest at the time. Seriously, isn't Skyrim big enough that more is going on than kids 'ruining' your experience?

Bioshock, little sisters, those are kids that are a major story point, to kill or to save. That is a dramatic choice to make that effects the game in epic proportions. If you just want to waste the kid who is standing next to your current questgiver, I think you might ponder the idea that Skyrim is perhaps (GASP!) boring you.

edit: yes this entire post is saying "The only reason you guys ask for these 'freedoms' and whine about 'limitations' is because this game is boring you and you won't admit it."

 

[Dogstile]

Because if I kill a kid in a game (mayor mcCreedy) i am totally an unstable individual who has a mental problem, right? (reference to another thread)

Just a bit, yeah.

All I'm hearing is a lot of people saying, "THE INABILITY TO CAVE IN A CHILD'S SKULL WITH AN AXE IS RUINING MY IMMERSION," which is batty.

Nope.

Oh, as reference, I haven't actually killed a kid in a game (not in any i'd remember anyway), but he's the one a lot of people reference. I just fail to see how killing a kid in a game = mental issue.

Hell, the only reason I have the child killing mod installed in skyrim is so when a town gets burned by dragons, you don't have two kids chasing eachother in a ghost town. Hell, that even pissed me off in fable, they could at least remove them from the game if the parents died. It was /weird/ having all the bowerstone children just... there. While the rest of the town is dead around them.

Are you telling me that wouldn't ruin immersion?

 

[KnightOfHearts]

Sure, why not
Just throw more murder into the mix, humanity is sure to love it!

Their only kids, innocent, happy and carefree.
I'd love to see Alex Mercer bust his hand through a kids face and eat him whilst listening to the childs pitiful screams for mercy....
Yes I'm being sarcastic.

 

[Chimichanga]

I personally don't care about this issue in that whether children are killable in a vanilla game or not because it does not change whether I'll buy and play a game.

However, I do like it when it is something you as a player find out rather than something that is explicitly marketed. For immersive games like Skyrim, I like it for the sense of immersion - I personally am not a bad character in that game (albeit quite kleptomaniacal) and have yet to find a situation where child murder would benefit me - but I always like it where there is at least the option, the freedom, to do so. It's sort of like all those useless miscellaneous items like forks and rakes; sure it doesn't matter that they're there, but you like having them there none the less because they give greater detail to the world. The option to kill kids is like a darker version of that - unless you're a complete sociopath you are never going to NEED to actually do it, but the fact that it can happen contributes to the sense of realism in the game.

I myself would probably not buy a game if it explicitly marketed the fact you could do so. Putting so much attention on such a thing for the sake of garnering publicity through controversy is the worst kind of attention-whoring and does not deserve to be rewarded.

 

[Folji]

Come to think, where did this massive wave of uncanny child-killing threads come from, anyway? It's as though that one Skyrim child-killing mod threw parts of the internet into massive debates in which people just keep on sharing their eagerness to see computer-generated children die. Just for the sake of immersion. And a couple of other things, bit mostly immersion.

Something tells me the same might have happened last time when someone did the same in Fallout 3, and likely a few more times before there again for other reasons, though I honestly can't remember.

 

[Pebblig]

If you put them in the game then I would say why the hell not, but why would you put them in the game... Skyrim would be an awful lot better without them, they could even spend some of that free time on fixing bugs.

One of the complaints(or maybe it was just a peculiar observation) about the previous Elder Scrolls games is that there are no children in the game. Then they put children into Fallout 3 and made them invincible(for obvious ESRB/Fox News related matters) and people complained about that. Personally, I have the child death mod installed, but I've never actually killed a kid in the game. I just don't want them to be immune to dragons and the like.

I emailed BBFC and PEGI on the subject of killing children in games. (using the example of Skyrim not having it, it then being modded in, and the fact I've never played a game where you can kill kids) I asked whether they could have any input on the content of a game (obviously they could say "take this out and it'll be 15, not 18") but basically they said they had no input on whether a game was released as it is or not, just that if it's an 18 it's an 18. I should also say that they both decided to reinforce the fact that the child killing mod isn't made by the developers, so I either worded my email poorly or they're assuming I'm a retard.

BBFC:

"Thank you for your enquiry.

The BBFC's classification decisions, including those for games, are carefully considered and made in line with the available research and our published Guidelines. Our Classification Guidelines are a product of both experience and an extensive public consultation process which is repeated regularly. Over 8,700 people contributed to the most recent revision of the Guidelines in 2009. These are available on our main website - http://www.bbfc.co.uk.

There is nothing in our Guidelines which prohibit the killing of children in games or films. However, in the case of THE ELDER SCROLLS V: SKYRIM, it is impossible to kill or harm any child character while playing this game. The 'child killing' mod you refer to was developed separately by a third party that allows players to over-ride this prohibition. It was not present in the game we classified at '15'.

If a version of the game was submitted with the mod enabled, we could potentially take a different view in terms of its classification. Otherwise, the availability of such a mod is beyond the remit of the BBFC. "

PEGI:
"Before addressing your specific concern, please allow me to explain the way games are rated under the PEGI system. The PEGI ratings are being composed with the use of an extensive questionnaire that deals with several topics, among which e.g. bad language, violence, and sex. Depending on the way these topics are represented in a game, a different age rating is the final result, accompanied by a certain content indicator.

One of the ground rules of PEGI is that it never censors or bans: PEGI always rates the entire content of a game that is submitted. In certain cases, publishers opt to change or omit certain content to avoid a certain age rating, but PEGI is not involved in these decisions, which are part of the larger game design process. In certain countries where PEGI is used (Italy and the United Kingdom) , the local law still allows the theoretical possibility of banning games - but in the last decade, there have been no games banned from sale. Censorship as in cutting content from games does not exist in countries where PEGI is used. Content censorship for videogames does exist in Germany, where the USK rating system is used.

Regarding the mod of Skyrim;
MOD?s are often made by fans that want to add something extra for the community. If they decide to make such a mod, there is nothing PEGI can do to stop this. Because it?s a free add-on and not an original part of the game.
Besides that, Skyrim already received the highest PEGI rating available (PEGI 18) based on depictions of gross violence, which includes torture, dismemberment, sadism and horrific depictions of death or injury towards human-like or animal-like characters and depictions of violence towards vulnerable or defenceless human-like characters."

I was simply never sure if the classification systems in place could prevent things. So it seems that developers choose not to put this feature in either because "they don't like it", "they want to avoid a media shit storm" or "the fact the government in a country may ban it's sale."

I wasn't aware that Dragon Age could be an example, but then I assume it's also the context the killing is in etc etc.

 

[Mythrignoc]

Yes, because in a game that allows you to kill anyone else for whatever reason, it makes absolutely no sense to not allow child death. It's one of the stupider things about Skyrim right now despite how much I like the game.

 

[Leole]

Yeah, if they add something to a game, in this case, children to Skyrim, they should be able to die.

And with the people saying "if you feel the need to kill kids in videogames, you're crazy" how come that doesn't apply to the hundreds of thousands of human NPCs I've killed. With that logic, I'm the next Hitler.

And just by wanting kids to be mortal, doesn't mean I'm going to kill them the next second I see one. People have said it before, and I'll say it again, it's not immersive to have a group of characters not binded by the rules of the game.

Not to mention, devs take this as an advantage to make NPCs INCREDIBLY annoying so you have to take it like a champ. Little Lamplight being one of the many examples. I cannot state how many times I wanted to kill Maglir (TES IV), he's such a whinny little *****.

"Oh, I can't go finish the mission, I'm too worried about my family". Then why the fuck would you sign up to a guild where murder and danger are the very first things that come up?

"Oh, you ratted me out when I didn't do the quest that I was hired for, and was binded by a contract" Then why the fuck did you take it in the first place?

Maglir, you piece of shit.

 

[RJ 17]

In general, I have nothing against /not/ being able to kill kids in a game. I can see why developers make it that way and really can't blame them for wanting to avoid the media uproar when the news gets out that you can spend your days disembowling 9 year olds.

That said, however, I DO have a problem with a game making every child in it being intentionally just THE most obnoxicious little brat as possible. I'll be quite honest, one of the things I liked about Skyrim was that as your character progresses, more and more people start acknowledging and respecting what you've done. Be it a guard pleading with you "Look, I know who you are...and what you do...but please, these are good folk around here...well mostly" to a random person admiring your abilities with illusion magic, I enjoy the fact that the game acknowledges my accomplishments. It adds to the immersion and makes you feel like your character, from humble beginnings, is really starting to become somebody that people know...a big-shot if you will.

To that end, there is NOTHING more annoying than walking into the Solitude pawn shop only to have the little runt sitting at the door say "Pffft, I thought adventurers were supposed to look tough..." or one of the children running through Whiterun approaching you and delcaring "I'm not afraid of you, even if you are my elder!" Or the worst, the Jarl of Whiterun's son heaving a sigh and saying with the utmost disrespect "Another wanderer here to lick my father's boots...good for you." Personally I find that to be quite the insults considering I had single-handedly saved that city like, seven times.

So in short, yeah, playing my assassin character who was darkly aligned and therefor not afraid to shank someone if he felt he was being disrespected, I got to find out the lame way (as many others have, I'm sure) that children in Skyrim have been granted immortality. And I admit with no small amount of shame that when I heard there was a mod for the PC version that let you kill children...I kinda really wish I had gotten it for the PC and not the XBox. Though to be fair, NOW I wish I had the PC version for the Macho Man Dragon mod.

Edit: But really in a game like Skyrim,, I'm staunchly opposed to ANYONE being immortal. The only exception would be to quest givers/people you turn quests into for the main quest only. In a game like Skyrim where there are literally countless quests available to you, you should be able to kill off anyone you want. And if they were a quest giver or an important part of the quest, well that's the consequences of your actions. For instance, after completing the the civil war quest line, the Windhelm castle was suddenly filled with every noble from The Reach (Markarth specifically), and for some reason every last one of them had a huge problem with me and would disrespect me to my face. So I hopped on the banquet table they were all sitting around, charged up the master level Fire spell, and literally unleashed hell, sending their lifeless bodies hurtling across the room in all directions....only to watch as they slowly got back up to their knees and eventually their feet like a bunch of zombies. To that I sighed and simply started taking out my agression by repeatedly "killing" them with my magic. When I first used the master lvl fire spell, I honestly didn't care if anyone in that room was important to some questline, I had already completed the main quest and the civil war so it no longer mattered to me, I just wanted them all dead to prove my evil character's dark power.

 

[Scars Unseen]

If you put them in the game then I would say why the hell not, but why would you put them in the game... Skyrim would be an awful lot better without them, they could even spend some of that free time on fixing bugs.

One of the complaints(or maybe it was just a peculiar observation) about the previous Elder Scrolls games is that there are no children in the game. Then they put children into Fallout 3 and made them invincible(for obvious ESRB/Fox News related matters) and people complained about that. Personally, I have the child death mod installed, but I've never actually killed a kid in the game. I just don't want them to be immune to dragons and the like.

I emailed BBFC and PEGI on the subject of killing children in games. (using the example of Skyrim not having it, it then being modded in, and the fact I've never played a game where you can kill kids) I asked whether they could have any input on the content of a game (obviously they could say "take this out and it'll be 15, not 18") but basically they said they had no input on whether a game was released as it is or not, just that if it's an 18 it's an 18. I should also say that they both decided to reinforce the fact that the child killing mod isn't made by the developers, so I either worded my email poorly or they're assuming I'm a retard.

BBFC:

"Thank you for your enquiry.

The BBFC's classification decisions, including those for games, are carefully considered and made in line with the available research and our published Guidelines. Our Classification Guidelines are a product of both experience and an extensive public consultation process which is repeated regularly. Over 8,700 people contributed to the most recent revision of the Guidelines in 2009. These are available on our main website - http://www.bbfc.co.uk.

There is nothing in our Guidelines which prohibit the killing of children in games or films. However, in the case of THE ELDER SCROLLS V: SKYRIM, it is impossible to kill or harm any child character while playing this game. The 'child killing' mod you refer to was developed separately by a third party that allows players to over-ride this prohibition. It was not present in the game we classified at '15'.

If a version of the game was submitted with the mod enabled, we could potentially take a different view in terms of its classification. Otherwise, the availability of such a mod is beyond the remit of the BBFC. "

PEGI:
"Before addressing your specific concern, please allow me to explain the way games are rated under the PEGI system. The PEGI ratings are being composed with the use of an extensive questionnaire that deals with several topics, among which e.g. bad language, violence, and sex. Depending on the way these topics are represented in a game, a different age rating is the final result, accompanied by a certain content indicator.

One of the ground rules of PEGI is that it never censors or bans: PEGI always rates the entire content of a game that is submitted. In certain cases, publishers opt to change or omit certain content to avoid a certain age rating, but PEGI is not involved in these decisions, which are part of the larger game design process. In certain countries where PEGI is used (Italy and the United Kingdom) , the local law still allows the theoretical possibility of banning games - but in the last decade, there have been no games banned from sale. Censorship as in cutting content from games does not exist in countries where PEGI is used. Content censorship for videogames does exist in Germany, where the USK rating system is used.

Regarding the mod of Skyrim;
MOD?s are often made by fans that want to add something extra for the community. If they decide to make such a mod, there is nothing PEGI can do to stop this. Because it?s a free add-on and not an original part of the game.
Besides that, Skyrim already received the highest PEGI rating available (PEGI 18) based on depictions of gross violence, which includes torture, dismemberment, sadism and horrific depictions of death or injury towards human-like or animal-like characters and depictions of violence towards vulnerable or defenceless human-like characters."

I was simply never sure if the classification systems in place could prevent things. So it seems that developers choose not to put this feature in either because "they don't like it", "they want to avoid a media shit storm" or "the fact the government in a country may ban it's sale."

I wasn't aware that Dragon Age could be an example, but then I assume it's also the context the killing is in etc etc.

Thanks for that. It's nice to have some perspectives on other ratings systems. I think that the concern in the US is that if the envelope is pushed too far(and I'm not sure how far that would be or if child killing would do it or not), a game can get rated "Adult Only." An AO rating would be the kiss of death for sales because no major retailer will stock AO rated games. It's not a ban, but it's close enough to one that there are only two AO rated games in existence that aren't porn games, one of which also has a Mature rated version available. No one wants an AO rating.

 

[Light 086]

What is with this recent obsession about having killable kids in games?

I was wondering that myself, it's getting me a little worried...

Personally I get by on killing everyone else!!!

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Morality is the sillies of all questions given that this issue is usually brought up every time a new Bethesda game comes around. In the course of Skyrim I slaughtered thousands of people. Even if you argue it was for the greater good at some point you have to stop and think that such a act puts me above the most monstrous people in history. Sure, Hitler might have ordered the death of millions but he didn't set out to butcher them personally. When you consider that at least a thousand of those people killed were killed simply because it was the easier path, even the "for the greater good" argument falls apart. A master of Illusion magic and stealth probably doesn't actually need to kill many people to get a job done.

 

[Gorilla Gunk]

Because if I kill a kid in a game (mayor mcCreedy) i am totally an unstable individual who has a mental problem, right? (reference to another thread)

Just a bit, yeah.

All I'm hearing is a lot of people saying, "THE INABILITY TO CAVE IN A CHILD'S SKULL WITH AN AXE IS RUINING MY IMMERSION," which is batty.

Nope.

Oh, as reference, I haven't actually killed a kid in a game (not in any i'd remember anyway), but he's the one a lot of people reference. I just fail to see how killing a kid in a game = mental issue.

Hell, the only reason I have the child killing mod installed in skyrim is so when a town gets burned by dragons, you don't have two kids chasing eachother in a ghost town. Hell, that even pissed me off in fable, they could at least remove them from the game if the parents died. It was /weird/ having all the bowerstone children just... there. While the rest of the town is dead around them.

Are you telling me that wouldn't ruin immersion?

No, it wouldn't.

Then again I'm not the weirdo who took the time to install a mod just so he could get the satisfaction of seeing a kids dead body.

 

[emeraldrafael]

No but they cant be in games where I have the free rule to kill anyone else.

 

[Tryforlive]

I dont see why not i would love to turn in to a werewolf in skyrim and tear little timmy to shreds NO I DONT WANNA PLAY TAG TIMMY.....

 

[Erik Lewis-wireman]

if a game is about freedom then we should be able to murder everyone and everything.

 

[Riki Darnell]

Because if I kill a kid in a game (mayor mcCreedy) i am totally an unstable individual who has a mental problem, right? (reference to another thread)

Just a bit, yeah.

All I'm hearing is a lot of people saying, "THE INABILITY TO CAVE IN A CHILD'S SKULL WITH AN AXE IS RUINING MY IMMERSION," which is batty.

Nope.

Oh, as reference, I haven't actually killed a kid in a game (not in any i'd remember anyway), but he's the one a lot of people reference. I just fail to see how killing a kid in a game = mental issue.

Hell, the only reason I have the child killing mod installed in skyrim is so when a town gets burned by dragons, you don't have two kids chasing eachother in a ghost town. Hell, that even pissed me off in fable, they could at least remove them from the game if the parents died. It was /weird/ having all the bowerstone children just... there. While the rest of the town is dead around them.

Are you telling me that wouldn't ruin immersion?

No, it wouldn't.

Then again I'm not the weirdo who took the time to install a mod just so he could get the satisfaction of seeing a kids dead body.

But most people are saying they don't want to necessarily go on an all child killing spree, they just want children to have the ability to die. And I agree with a lot of the posters saying they hate having kids alive in a ghost town. I played a good character in Fable 3 and Skyrim and I hate that children can't die if a dragon is right above them shooting flames at their face. It's not a matter of being a weirdo or mental, it's about ruining a games immersion.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

Well you should be able too but it should be frowned upon in game I guess. You kill a kid and instantly like 50K bounty in Skyrim would work.

 

[Akimoto]

For Skyrim, yes. I'm waiting for the mod - I won't save the game though, it's just to let off steam.

Slightly off topic - But in general I think kid killing can be included but not as a scare/shock tactic. It must portray character flaws as part of the story, it must not be gratuitous violence, the scene must be made optional with a 'click me' option to kill or not kill and lastly it must not yield in-game material rewards in the game. In my personal and honest opinion, this should allow games that appeal to mature audiences to be better accepted as a story medium, and as a form of art.

What do you guys think? PM me if you must.

 

[Singularly Datarific]

No- but if you make a game in such that the player actually WANTS to kill the little brats, you've got a problem (looking at YOUUUU, Bethesda)