Originally posted by Smasandian
And who cares.I never once heard somebody say about GTA4, the early ones or other games, "I can't ****ing believe they don't have kids in it."
The only time i've cared was in STO, where every male has a five o'clock shadow due to the possibility of using the character creatore to make children.
Bar that, I don't care as long as i get to run something over.
What's so important about having children in a GTA game? Are you seriously wanting to blow one of their brains out or run them over or something? Why? Are you people really this stupid?
If you think everything that's in reality should be in this game, why not also whine about not being able to pick your nose or stick your finger up your arse? Those are realistic and yet they aren't in this realistic game. Complain, people, complain!
Originally posted by Smasandian
And who cares.I never once heard somebody say about GTA4, the early ones or other games, "I can't ****ing believe they don't have kids in it."
*slowly raises hand*
I said that. And I said it about Saints Row 1 and 2, as well (I say it about any game that tries to be semi-realisic but leaves out kids because of whiny-ass Chrisian Parents) No babies...not kids....that stands out to me because 24% of the US population is less than 18.
An entire quarter of every single person seen is not represented. About 6.5% of every person in America is less than 5 years old.
We get plenty black female hookers...despite the fact that they HUGELY our outweighed by children under 5, by percentage.
In fact, you don't have to do hardly anything to accomplish this. Create your templates, assign dice roles to those templates based on population averages (white, black, age, etc), let the game engine auto-generate based on those templates and adjusted dice-rolls...boom....insta representation of how America really would be.
That programming is so simple that you could literally do it in one afternoon...if you already had your random generation-engine and dice-roll programming completed, of course. Just invoke those objects into your adjusted templates and dice rolls to accomplish it and you have a properly represented population. Wanna an awesome city that is realistic (seriously, everyone was shitting themselves at how realistic the graphics looked)? Tell the Christians to STFU OR...slap on an A rating.
"But, sales would be damaged by that!" The market is maturing...right now, that would be true. But it would be downloadable onto harddrives via the stores, steam, or other such offerings. I don't see an "A" rating hurting games on PC-Only releases. I don't see it hurting console sales (much) in the next generation of consoles (they will be PCs...like they pretty much are now).
Originally posted by Darth Martin
Wow. Can't believe your bitching about that. What purpose does having children in the game add to it? Just to say it's more realistic? So you can run them over or perform drive-by shootings on them?🙄
Having humans of all ages definitely does not mean I can say it is more realistic. It IS more realistic. 😉
But let me turn your argument right on its head: what's the point of eliminating children from a game that has you constantly murdering and committing crimes? Just to say that you didn't do everything bad? Pathetic. It's just pandering to a small niche of whiners. Also, it creates a false sense of "ethics" in the gamers. It is "magically" much worse to kill a child than it is to kill a prostitute that you've lured into a secret alcove. It is splitting ethics down an arbitrary line. A person walking on the side-walk is no more helpless than a child walking on the side-walk...when it comes to you speeding down the sidewalk. They are both fantasy murder.
🙄
Originally posted by BackFire
Having kids would just guarantee an AO rating and thus make the game more or less unsellable. Not gonna happen.
As it turns out, that's not entirely true. In fact, it would definitely not hold true for a game like GTA. In FACT...it might actually cause people to buy it MORE. 😄 (I'm not kidding. I know it is not perfectly parallel, but "naughtier" director's cuts get sold much more often than the theatrical release cuts IF they are both sold separately.)
I believe it was in Australia that a decent selling game got an adult rating. But it magically did not hurt the sales. Is it possible that people with money will purchase a game they want regardless of the rating?
Ignorant parents do it all the time. They buy their children mature titles left and right. Getting b*tched out by a 10 year old on CoD or MW is quite hilarious and disturbing at the same time.
Originally posted by dadudemon
..I believe it was in Australia that a decent selling game got an adult rating. But it magically did not hurt the sales. Is it possible that people with money will purchase a game they want regardless of the rating?
.
😬
We don't have an adult rating here but they're in the process of making it happen.
Originally posted by Kazenji
😬We don't have an adult rating here but they're in the process of making it happen.
Australia?
If you're from Australia, yes, you do have an adequate rating system. It is better than the US's, actually.
You have Restricted which is 18 or over.
And you have X which is the same exact age requirements as restricted. Yours is better because you can solve the problem of "shiiit...is this a porn game or is it a violent game?" In the case of GTA, it will get an 18+ rating: Restricted.
Your system allows for parents to know when games are intended as something other than porn. Here in the US, we combine sex and extreme violence into our AO rating. Manhunt 2, for the PC, was pursued by the gaming community and there was literally an internet outcry when Gamefly purchased Direct2Drive but forced the elimination of AO titles.
Tell me: would ANY of you NOT purchase GTA V IF it had children and allowed you to kill them just like every other NPC?
Well, it is better. 😄
There would no be the Manhunt 2 controversy if the ESRB (which is not a government entity, unlike Australia's) had 2 separate adult ratings: one rating for dedicated-porn video games and the other for non-porn adult games. There's no arbitrary "violence" line in Australia's system. It's great, actually.
To me, a system that facilitates racists to kill only black people in a video game is just as bad as allowing people to kill children: they're both bad for the same reasons.
Besides, children are vile and parasitic creatures: who DOESN'T want to kill them? 😆
(JK, of course)
Originally posted by Nemesis X
If GTA had you killing kids, I would not buy it. At all 😐
There's a difference between the designers building missions and side-quests that are specifically for killing children...and having a game with child NPCs that are every bit as "mortal" as other characters.
My question was not "if a game had you killing children". I worded my question quite specifically to avoid that. My question was this:
"would ANY of you NOT purchase GTA V IF it had children and allowed you to kill them just like every other NPC?"
Allowing you to kill is not the same thing as what you're talking about: "if gta HAD you killing kids." That's worded in a way that means you are forced to kill kids as part of the game. No, that's not the question I presented. If you did not want to kill children...don't! 😄 It's quite simple. You can do it in the real world, too. What's great about Sandbox games are how realistic and how moralistic the games can be for each individual.
Originally posted by dadudemon
There's a difference between the designers building missions and side-quests that are specifically for killing children...and having a game with child NPCs that are every bit as "mortal" as other characters.My question was not "if a game had you killing children". I worded my question quite specifically to avoid that. My question was this:
"would ANY of you NOT purchase GTA V IF it had children and allowed you to kill them just like every other NPC?"
Allowing you to kill is not the same thing as what you're talking about: "if gta HAD you killing kids." That's worded in a way that means you are forced to kill kids as part of the game. No, that's not the question I presented. If you did not want to kill children...don't! 😄 It's quite simple. You can do it in the real world, too. What's great about Sandbox games are how realistic and how moralistic the games can be for each individual.
Even as a random NPC, the child would still be killable. In GTA games, I always accidentally kill random civilians since in some situations, it can't be avoided and if any of them were children, I'd be mortified.
I can't believe you're even talking about this crap. You're a dad and you want to have kids in a game like this? You have issues.
Originally posted by Nemesis X
Even as a random NPC, the child would still be killable. In GTA games, I always accidentally kill random civilians since in some situations, it can't be avoided and if any of them were children, I'd be mortified.
You're mortified by accidentally killing children (in what game have you done this?)...but you're not mortified by killing everyone else?
Do you see how arbitrary that is? Not only is it a hypocritical position, it is also quite arbitrary.
On a side note: half the time, you can't really tell who you are running over...if you have decent speed.
Watch, I can represent another arbitrary position that means as much as the "no-children" rules: I think being able to kill women in video games is wrong. It depicts violence against women. In games that allow you to trick and then kill prostitutes...even kick them out of your car...that's wrong on so many levels. It's far worse than being able to shoot or run over children. One is targeting a very specific demographic and the other is not programmed, for, specifically by the game makers. (That last line may create arguments from people trying to NOT get the point. So I'll clarify to prevent the contrarians from being able to have a legitimate reply: being able to hire and kick out a prostitute is something specifically programmed for. Being able to kill any character is also specifically programmed for. However, one is general, broad (pun?), and blanketed. The other is aimed at a very specific demographic. So no arguing "well, they are both specifically programmed for". Arguing that is to miss my point).
Obviously, I do not hold the above position. I just think people could make a better case about violence against women than they can about simply having the ability to kill children.
Originally posted by Nemesis X
I can't believe you're even talking about this crap. You're a dad and you want to have kids in a game like this? You have issues.
Actually, I thought something similar about you: I can't believe you even believe that crap you're posting.
Originally posted by Kazenji
You may think so.....but theres thousands of gamers here that say how we do the ratings on games need a complete overhaul.
Why, though?
Are games getting the Restricted and X ratings when they shouldn't or something? Even then...it really does not matter. Ultimately, it is up to the adult, at the point of purchase. If they do not want their children playing ultra violent or pornographic children, they need to be able to make an informed decision.