So, in the upcoming update you can adopt kids in Skyrim.

[Jack Rascal]

Can I adopt them all? And I mean all of them, from every city? Can I then take them to some cave and leave them there?

OT: 'Fus-ro-dah'-ing the little shits off of cliffs doesn't sound like a bad idea...

That sounds like a great idea too. You know, like a stress relief thing. I would certainly feel better if I could do that.

 

[Soopy]

Uh, why? I'm not really a Skyrim fan and I don't know much about this update, but why would you want to adopt a kid? I remember having a family in Fable, but they were pointless, other than my wife being fun to murder when I got bored. Other than the Sims, I don't see why you need kids in any game.

My sentiments exactly. This exactly why I posted what I did.

 

[Epona]

The Elder Sims 5: Skyrim.

Fixed that for you.

Also...I don't get what the big deal is with the guys who complain. You can marry, and there are mods to have children. Now you have the completely optional choice to get children without other mods. It's not like you have to. But...wait, I suppose you're right - it's piece of content definitely not for this game. In fact, I'll immediately petition Bethesda to remove houses and marriage - it just gets in my way of killing stuff. I think I can live without cities, too. In fact, they should have just made the game a giant dungeon and that's it.

Go back and play Morrowind or even Oblivion before you exaggerate.

 

[Epona]

Oh no, god forbid you can roleplay in a roleplaying game!

So the sims is an RPG now is it?

When does it stop being RPG and start being a fucking around simulator?

The point of roleplaying games is to play a role. If that role includes being a nice guy who will adopt and look after an orphan child, so much the better.

When you play a Mario game, you are playing a role, as Mario. When are people going to learn to stop taking it so literally? Skyrim is more action adventure than RPG and now it's a simulation game too.

 

[repeating integers]

Oh no, god forbid you can roleplay in a roleplaying game!

So the sims is an RPG now is it?

When does it stop being RPG and start being a fucking around simulator?

The point of roleplaying games is to play a role. If that role includes being a nice guy who will adopt and look after an orphan child, so much the better.

When you play a Mario game, you are playing a role, as Mario. When are people going to learn to stop taking it so literally? Skyrim is more action adventure than RPG and now it's a simulation game too.

Alright, I suppose the point of roleplaying games is to play YOUR OWN role.

Everyone getting upset about this is hilarious and/or infuriating, btw.

 

[Epona]

Oh no, god forbid you can roleplay in a roleplaying game!

So the sims is an RPG now is it?

When does it stop being RPG and start being a fucking around simulator?

The point of roleplaying games is to play a role. If that role includes being a nice guy who will adopt and look after an orphan child, so much the better.

When you play a Mario game, you are playing a role, as Mario. When are people going to learn to stop taking it so literally? Skyrim is more action adventure than RPG and now it's a simulation game too.

Alright, I suppose the point of roleplaying games is to play YOUR OWN role.

Everyone getting upset about this is hilarious and/or infuriating, btw.

Having an opinion =/= upset.

In fact, this just reinforces my idea that Skyrim is nothing like the past 2 games. It doesn't hold my interest and now I see that Bethesda is targeting casual fans. Chasing the WoW and/or Sims crowd.

All three B's have faltered lately.

 

[repeating integers]

Oh no, god forbid you can roleplay in a roleplaying game!

So the sims is an RPG now is it?

When does it stop being RPG and start being a fucking around simulator?

The point of roleplaying games is to play a role. If that role includes being a nice guy who will adopt and look after an orphan child, so much the better.

When you play a Mario game, you are playing a role, as Mario. When are people going to learn to stop taking it so literally? Skyrim is more action adventure than RPG and now it's a simulation game too.

Alright, I suppose the point of roleplaying games is to play YOUR OWN role.

Everyone getting upset about this is hilarious and/or infuriating, btw.

Having an opinion =/= upset.

In fact, this just reinforces my idea that Skyrim is nothing like the past 2 games. It doesn't hold my interest and now I see that Bethesda is targeting casual fans. Chasing the WoW and/or Sims crowd.

All three B's have faltered lately.

Well, alright, you weren't getting upset (quite). Several people (not naming names) definitely are.

Anyway, it's hilarious/infuriating because, yet again, gamers demonstrate that they cannot countenance the idea of developers catering (even partially) to people who don't hold the same opinion as them. It's like music fans, except more angry and less dismissive.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Oh... My... God... REALLY?!

Well I can't wait, I'd save as many children as I could from that horrible Orphan matron.

Just kill her, no need to actually adopt them.

And seriously, why would you want to adopt anyone? They're annoying enough as it is without having one in every home.

 

[Epona]

Oh no, god forbid you can roleplay in a roleplaying game!

So the sims is an RPG now is it?

When does it stop being RPG and start being a fucking around simulator?

The point of roleplaying games is to play a role. If that role includes being a nice guy who will adopt and look after an orphan child, so much the better.

When you play a Mario game, you are playing a role, as Mario. When are people going to learn to stop taking it so literally? Skyrim is more action adventure than RPG and now it's a simulation game too.

Alright, I suppose the point of roleplaying games is to play YOUR OWN role.

Everyone getting upset about this is hilarious and/or infuriating, btw.

Having an opinion =/= upset.

In fact, this just reinforces my idea that Skyrim is nothing like the past 2 games. It doesn't hold my interest and now I see that Bethesda is targeting casual fans. Chasing the WoW and/or Sims crowd.

All three B's have faltered lately.

Well, alright, you weren't getting upset (quite). Several people (not naming names) definitely are.

Anyway, it's hilarious/infuriating because, yet again, gamers demonstrate that they cannot countenance the idea of developers catering (even partially) to people who don't hold the same opinion as them. It's like music fans, except more angry and less dismissive.

Yes, gamers should like every game on the market, even if they don't like the genre, artsyle, gameplay, etc..

Really?

 

[DoPo]

The Elder Sims 5: Skyrim.

Fixed that for you.

Also...I don't get what the big deal is with the guys who complain. You can marry, and there are mods to have children. Now you have the completely optional choice to get children without other mods. It's not like you have to. But...wait, I suppose you're right - it's piece of content definitely not for this game. In fact, I'll immediately petition Bethesda to remove houses and marriage - it just gets in my way of killing stuff. I think I can live without cities, too. In fact, they should have just made the game a giant dungeon and that's it.

Go back and play Morrowind or even Oblivion before you exaggerate.

I came into Skyrim to kill bad guys, not start an orphanage..

Well, obviously they gave you too much stuff. And as I said, I don't get what the big deal is - the only reasonable explanations I see are that either people are raging about having the option for a choice which is somehow bad (especially considering it's an ES game) or you will be forced to adopt a child in the expansion, thus reducing your choice. Which one is it?

 

[BathorysGraveland]

I gotta agree with DoPo. If you don't like a feature, don't use it. No point in getting all worked up over it. I couldn't give a flying fuck about mounted combat, but they are putting it in. I'll simply not use it. Simple as that, end of.

 

[repeating integers]

Oh no, god forbid you can roleplay in a roleplaying game!

So the sims is an RPG now is it?

When does it stop being RPG and start being a fucking around simulator?

The point of roleplaying games is to play a role. If that role includes being a nice guy who will adopt and look after an orphan child, so much the better.

When you play a Mario game, you are playing a role, as Mario. When are people going to learn to stop taking it so literally? Skyrim is more action adventure than RPG and now it's a simulation game too.

Alright, I suppose the point of roleplaying games is to play YOUR OWN role.

Everyone getting upset about this is hilarious and/or infuriating, btw.

Having an opinion =/= upset.

In fact, this just reinforces my idea that Skyrim is nothing like the past 2 games. It doesn't hold my interest and now I see that Bethesda is targeting casual fans. Chasing the WoW and/or Sims crowd.

All three B's have faltered lately.

Well, alright, you weren't getting upset (quite). Several people (not naming names) definitely are.

Anyway, it's hilarious/infuriating because, yet again, gamers demonstrate that they cannot countenance the idea of developers catering (even partially) to people who don't hold the same opinion as them. It's like music fans, except more angry and less dismissive.

Yes, gamers should like every game on the market, even if they don't like the genre, artsyle, gameplay, etc..

Really?

I'm pretty sure that's a non-sequitur. I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

 

[Epona]

I'm pretty sure that's a non-sequitur. I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

Let's see:

I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

Oh yeah?

Anyway, it's hilarious/infuriating because, yet again, gamers demonstrate that they cannot countenance the idea of developers catering (even partially) to people who don't hold the same opinion as them. It's like music fans, except more angry and less dismissive.

So by making "developers" plural, you were only talking about Bethesda?

"Yet again" seems to imply that you are referencing other games.

By music fans, you mean alot of examples of people disliking alot of different songs because the artist sold out?

Funnily enough, right after you say you are only talking about Skyrim, you say this:

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

This surely isn't only about Skyrim.

 

[HarryScull]

Well that's neat I guess. Will there be any kids worth adopting, though... (no, the answer is no)

Thats not true, I could use them as dragon bait...

 

[repeating integers]

I'm pretty sure that's a non-sequitur. I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

Let's see:

I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

Oh yeah?

Anyway, it's hilarious/infuriating because, yet again, gamers demonstrate that they cannot countenance the idea of developers catering (even partially) to people who don't hold the same opinion as them. It's like music fans, except more angry and less dismissive.

So by making "developers" plural, you were only talking about Bethesda?

"Yet again" seems to imply that you are referencing other games.

By music fans, you mean alot of examples of people disliking alot of different songs because the artist sold out?

Funnily enough, right after you say you are only talking about Skyrim, you say this:

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

This surely isn't only about Skyrim.

Well, OK. I could have misstated myself. Let's try that again, see if it works this time.

Developers often put new content into their games, sometimes for free. Other times, they release paid additional content which is entirely optional, so you don't have to get it. Gamers have consistently complained about these optional features - bed spawnpoints in Minecraft, weapons packs in ME2, the like. Now this. You don't have to adopt a child, but of course, people complain about the very idea of being able to. This doesn't strike you as, at best, odd?

 

[orangeban]

Jeez, a lot of people seem upset about this, the adding of a totally optional feature. Uh, that's a bit odd. I mean, I probably won't adopt a kid, but it's nice to have the option.

 

[Epona]

I'm pretty sure that's a non-sequitur. I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

Let's see:

I wasn't, after all, talking about other games. I was talking about Skyrim.

Oh yeah?

Anyway, it's hilarious/infuriating because, yet again, gamers demonstrate that they cannot countenance the idea of developers catering (even partially) to people who don't hold the same opinion as them. It's like music fans, except more angry and less dismissive.

So by making "developers" plural, you were only talking about Bethesda?

"Yet again" seems to imply that you are referencing other games.

By music fans, you mean alot of examples of people disliking alot of different songs because the artist sold out?

Funnily enough, right after you say you are only talking about Skyrim, you say this:

A consistent attitude I've seen displayed on gaming forums is "Waaaaaah! They're putting an optional thing into a game that I won't use! Fuck them, remove it!" This has surfaced again here.

This surely isn't only about Skyrim.

Well, OK. I could have misstated myself. Let's try that again, see if it works this time.

Developers often put new content into their games, sometimes for free. Other times, they release paid additional content which is entirely optional, so you don't have to get it. Gamers have consistently complained about these optional features - bed spawnpoints in Minecraft, weapons packs in ME2, the like. Now this. You don't have to adopt a child, but of course, people complain about the very idea of being able to. This doesn't strike you as, at best, odd?

Nope.

As consumers we should have opinions about the entertainment we buy. It's ok when people ***** about a movie sequel being shitty and it's ok when it happens in games too. In the case of free content, I don't see the difference. Bethesda is making a well loved RPG series into an action adventure simulation game so you can imagine that loyal fans (until now) would be bothered.

Bethesda is chasing the casual crowd with Skyrim and the WoW crowd with their MMO. I am not part of either crowd and I would bet that many previous TES fans aren't either.

On the plus side, maybe my Sims loving girlfriend will play Skyrim now, make it worth the $60.

 

[Fappy]

Wait... people are actually mad about this? I don't think Alduin's going to hold a gun to your head and force you to sign adoption papers...

 

[Tannhausyr]

Wait... people are actually mad about this? I don't think Alduin's going to hold a gun to your head and force you to sign adoption papers...

now that would be worth a download - Skyrim: The Divorce Settlement...

 

[Clearing the Eye]

There's a few mods that allow your character to have relationships with the child inhabitants of Skyrim. Leave it to the modders to be two steps ahead of the developers