Skyrim Child Killing Mod

[lapan]

Yeah, the devs were really just asking for it by making the kids taunt you at every opportunity.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Sometimes when I complain about immature content in a game trolls say to me:

"It's fun. Have you got something against fun jerkface?"

Well, in return, I now say:

"If I ever meet you in real life, stay the hell away from my kids, jerkfaces"

You should not want to kill kids. If you've got a problem with those kids, walk away from them. It's a pretty simple bleeding concept that you should have (but probably didn't) learnt in real life. Kind of like on this forum, when trolls tell others:

"If you don't like the content of this post, don't read it"

I know a lot of you might have had trouble with highschool, in which you may have wished you could kill that damn handsome boy who did homework well, played sports and had many friends of the opposite sex, but you didn't do it in real life, and you should be able to get by without doing it in games.

If you're on the 'I just want a realistic representation' bandwagon then I still think you should not want the chance to kill kids. If you want realism you shouldn't be walking around with fire balls, killing giant spiders, or instantly healing a percentage of your hitpoints by consuming a plant or combination of plants you picked up off the ground, or imbibing a red fluid. Maybe you should just imagine that in this world, kids reign supreme as a silent mass of influential, omnicient beings.

EDIT: There turns out to be a third party: People who got pissed off by the mocking kids. "Rise Above" is the first thing to come to mind, but if I ever wanted to get rid of kids I'd want to try do something like using magic to levitate them and deposit them on top of a pillar, or smacking them off map with the DK hammer from super smash bros. Slicing into them with an axe doesn't interest me.

If you're thinking of typing "Yo, urprobablyright, it's a game - has no consequences, should not be a matter of weight", well, I have considered that opinion and am sick of people saying stuff like that to justify games that are just appealing to shock popularity.

There's a term for this in the movie world: "Exploitation movies", movies that are full of ridiculous scenes just for appeal (see: The Human Centipede, A Serbian Film) You guys just want some hideous abandon as far as I concern no reasoning about the fact that it is simulated takes away from the fact that you patronize simulated child abuse.

That's all well and good, but a much, much simpler and less game-breaking solution would be to NOT HAVE KIDS IN THE GAME IN THE FIRST PLACE.

But seriously, I've never understood the obsession with kids being some special case.

You really shouldn't be harming anyone. Not harming children to me is merely a subset of this, and I see no point in making any special exceptions.

 

[poleboy]

Why should Bethesda risk the bad press and lawsuits and all the other fallout, when they know that the community will mod the hell out of the game within two weeks, adding all the stuff Bethesda couldn't or wouldn't, including child-killing? It's just good business sense, really. A few extra sold copies for the child-murder enthusiasts isn't really worth the shitstorm it would raise.

 

[mooncalf]

Bethesda didn't put children in previous games because they knew they wouldn't allow those digikids to be the object/subject of digiviolence, they knew it would be incongruous to have them immune. I find it distressing that there are people hating on them when all they've done is taken a step in the right direction, at least having kids in the game world makes it a little more authentic...

Now, Bethesda, guys, I love you, but did you have to make the Whiterun kids obnoxious brats? Okay so they're viking kids, I get that, but it wouldn't be so hard to ignore their immunity if I didn't want to tell them off at least. :3

 

[DYin01]

They made the right decision not including this in the game because if they did, we'd have that whole GTA thing all over again. That said, I'm also happy the modders changed it. It would be nice if the developers didn't turn the kids into annoying little shits.

 

[chadachada123]

The devs at Bethesda are people, people who probably arent comfortable with children dying.

It's not just a moral thing. It's that Bethesda is afraid of really bad press. I mean look at Mass Effect for Chrissake and how Fox News overreacted to a 5 second sex scene. Skyrim being marketed as a "Babykiller simulator" is not the kind of press they want

It's the same reason why Grand Theft Auto games dont have children, schools or animals in them.

Well of course, no one wants to be associated with a game where you can kill children, its still not being afraid of controversy, its being a smart person, how exactly would killing children actually improve the experience in any way, apart from stirring up controversy?
I could understand if it showed kids dying, to drive home a point, as Modern Warfare 3 apparently has, but killing them yourself? Theres no need for it to be in there

Are you suggesting that MW3s depiction of one little girl getting blown up was to "drive home a point" and was NOT put in solely to stir up controversy?

Besides, Skyrim is an open-world game that encourages freedom and a degree of realism. Realistically, if all other creatures young and old can be destroyed, it follows that children should be held similarly. This includes the possibility of killing them yourself like you could murder any adult NPC. There's no "need" for it to be in there just as there's no "need" for skinning animals for fur or sucking blood for vampirism or any other action that allows for deeper roleplaying.

IF you wish to include children, don't make them indestructible, because it breaks the illusion to see children walk away unscathed from a dragon attack that slaughtered all nearby adults.

 

[])rStrangelove]

Hmmm. I'm split 50-50 between "i-play-games-for-fun-and-that-is-beyond-the-funny-point" and "i-enjoy-open-world-games-where-nothing-limits-you".

I guess i'm going with the not-funny point: if pictures or videos of this mod make it into the 'civilized' world which gives a **** about how gamers want to be seen this will one more step into the wrong direction.

Seriously, unneeded and better not be blown out of proportion by generating any special attention. Forget & move on plz for our own sake.

 

[Therumancer]

Other games like "Fallout 2" allowed you to kill kids if you wanted to, and really we've been seeing the game industry backpedaling from things like that. At one time Bethesda was one of the edgier game developers.

You are aware Fallout 2 was not made by Bethesda right?
OT: Personally, I don't really care. I won't download the mod myself because it is not a big deal to me, but I can understand why some would want it, whether it be for realism or to get the brats to shut the hell up (they REALLY annoy me too), so no skin off my back if someone decides to download it, just not really worth taking the time to hunt down and install it in my opinion.

Yes I am, Fallout 2 is simply an example of a game where you could kill kids. Also it's a liscence they bought out, and arguably sanitized. They claim they continued the series, but in Fallout 3 they created the most annoying brats possible (who tote guns no less) and then made it so that no matter how brutal your character was you couldn't kill them.... and put it in a mandatory section of the main quest. I mean after about the 53rd time some kid called me "Mungo" or acted like I was his inferior or threatened me, I was pretty much ready to engage in some serious darwinism and clean out that section of the gene pool.

Of course then again it should be noted that the problem comes down to the kids being annoying (more so than say Fallout 2 actually) in all of Bethesda's games, as if to revel in the fact that you can't kill them (and really, really make you want to)... I mean it's like parents don't disapline their children (which would be appropriate in Skyrim... if not relevent to Fallout 3), and of course part of the problem is that there is no real middle ground between murder and just tolerating it permitted by such games... which is why "kill" comes up so frequently. I mean if I could punt the little sh@t, backhand them, or even spank them in the middle of the street or whatever and shut them up that might be sufficient, but that's a lot of coding for something so trivial.

This if course doesn't even touch on the simplest solution for a lot of people, I mean we want kids in virtual worlds for the sake of completeness, some kids can be obnoxious, but not ALL of them are. You know having kids just being kids and playing like in some other games, or even being cute and likable would also be fine.

I'll also be honest in saying that one problem with unkillable kids is that it means that you don't have any NPCs that can join you. To be honest, in some of these games I wouldn't mind having a squire or a herald.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

As I much as I would like to have the option to kill children, I've developed an alternative. If a kid annoys me, his parents get it. You may be immortal, Timmy, but mommy and daddy aren't. Enjoy being an orphan.

 

[Mordreich]

Now that I think about it, I can recall several child-sised skeletons and other corpsey things in Oblivion and Fallout 3. Oblivion didn't even have living kids, just dead ones.

 

[tkioz]

Personally I wont be getting this mod, unless it's a "fix" pack (god does this game need one on the PC, stupid UI) that I download, since I don't generally look at all the content in those; however I'd be okay with a "remove kids" mod. I don't want to kill them, even to me there are somethings that are just squicky and I wouldn't do, even in a game, but I really would rather not deal with the little shits.

I'm sorry but even at 7/8 years old I wouldn't have taunted the guy carrying a blood encrusted broadsword with the maniacal glint in his eyes.

The kids in Skyrim are just plain obnoxious, I have yet to meet one that hasn't made me watch to boot them up the ass.

 

[poleboy]

This isn't about killing mildly annoying characters that any sane person wouldn't mind, this is about challenging authority and proving to yourself that you are a badass, it's pretty damn pathetic really. Nobody would even care about killing kids if the game allowed you to, it's like if you take a toy from a toddler and they start crying even though they weren't playing with it.

If Skyrim is really so broken and insufferable because it doesn't let you murder children for the audacious atrocity of offending your delicate little southern dandy senses with some laughably weak taunts, then maybe you shouldn't be playing it in the first place. Maybe instead you can sit in the corner and cry all day about the kids who bullied you in grade school.

"Everyone who does not share my opinion is a whiny, crying child and should be ignored".

That's a real classy argument there. Inventive, too. Congratulations on that.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

The devs at Bethesda are people, people who probably arent comfortable with children dying.

It's not just a moral thing. It's that Bethesda is afraid of really bad press. I mean look at Mass Effect for Chrissake and how Fox News overreacted to a 5 second sex scene. Skyrim being marketed as a "Babykiller simulator" is not the kind of press they want

It's the same reason why Grand Theft Auto games dont have children, schools or animals in them.

Well of course, no one wants to be associated with a game where you can kill children, its still not being afraid of controversy, its being a smart person, how exactly would killing children actually improve the experience in any way, apart from stirring up controversy?
I could understand if it showed kids dying, to drive home a point, as Modern Warfare 3 apparently has, but killing them yourself? Theres no need for it to be in there

Are you suggesting that MW3s depiction of one little girl getting blown up was to "drive home a point" and was NOT put in solely to stir up controversy?

Besides, Skyrim is an open-world game that encourages freedom and a degree of realism. Realistically, if all other creatures young and old can be destroyed, it follows that children should be held similarly. This includes the possibility of killing them yourself like you could murder any adult NPC. There's no "need" for it to be in there just as there's no "need" for skinning animals for fur or sucking blood for vampirism or any other action that allows for deeper roleplaying.

IF you wish to include children, don't make them indestructible, because it breaks the illusion to see children walk away unscathed from a dragon attack that slaughtered all nearby adults.

Well I havent actually played MW3 yet, but while I know its probably mainly for controversy, is it really so bad if they actually try to put one emotionaly scene in that actually does show what war is like without it being glorified? Make of it what you will, but at least its something that Infinity Ward is doing that nearly no other mainstream developer is. Slowly but surely if the big name games do this then maybe other games will start to use these sorts of scenes in more powerful ways?

Besides as I said, I wouldnt mind if children could die, its just i would mind if you could kill them, call it immersion breaking but I just dont think its what the average gamer wants. Sure theres the argument that "Oh you can kill everything else" But to a majority of people, the killing of children is taboo, and its very hard for a lot of people to let go of that. Its kind of like saying, why isnt there rape in this game? I mean i can kill this woman, and its something that happens in real life so why cant I?

I know the analogy was a little extreme but its the same sort of morality thing, at least how I see it, other people might not though.

 

[Sagacious Zhu]

Bethesda, if you don't want us to make a child-killing, don't make the children in your games annoying little shits.

"What are you looking at? I'm not afraid of you; even if you are my elder!"
"Another ragged adventurer come to lick my father's boots. Good job"
"I thought adventurers were supposed to look tough!"

How could any sane, rational human being refrain from obliterating such whiny, pompous little demons?

 

[Casual Shinji]

Call me a conservative pussy who doesn't get with the times, but something about killing kids just for the heck of it doesn't sit right with me.

If the story actually lends itself for it, like say a Lord of the Flies type game then I wouldn't mind, but killing kids just for the sake of venting some anger is not for me at all.

 

[Caliostro]

Would you do it in real life?

As opposed to murdering everyone else? That much is fine in real life right?

But don't worry, I'm sure we'll all carefully consider that argument next time we're slaying magical flying dragons with the fire we're shooting out of our hands!

When you understand why my argument is ridiculous, you'll understand why yours is even more ludicrous.

 

[AngloDoom]

Can someone seriously explain to me why killing an NPC that got stuck in a door is fine and dandy, but killing an NPC that's slightly smaller and with a higher-pitched voice isn't?

Surely, with the logic some people have used on this forum the people who join the Dark Brotherhood are all serial-killers waiting to happen in the same way as someone throwing a fireball at a mini NPC apparently paints them as a child-killer?

 

[Aeon_COR]

I always thought it was just a ratings thing, by disabling it but making it rather easy to mod back in they get to keep their M rating.