Over the top with mature themes.

[Drool]

People often confuse rights with requirements.

Just because you have the right to walk down the street yammering like a jackass doesn't mean you should, that it's a good idea, or that choosing not to somehow means that your rights have been stolen.

[kira]

Yes, I did read it.

But you gave no good reason. Is it "censorship" is team itself decides not to have them? No. They just don't want. Fallout 2 case was bad coding, nothing more. They removed sprites, not children. You could still kill the kids.

Having children in the quest means nothing. Same quest could be done by having adults in it.

"Tradition" =/= good.

Further more, only reason you gave to be able to kill them boils down to "I want to be able". What does being able to kill children add to the game? Make it more "mature"?

You gave no good reason to include killable children. You basically said you want them for sake of wanting them.

I want to be able to rape and kill, not necessarily in that order, sometimes I kill and rape, everyone I meet. Why? Because of"realism" and because I want to be able, otherwise it breaks the suspension of disbelief. Doesn't mean I will do it, I just want to be able.

Apparently no matter what he says won't get through to you(not trying to start a flame war) but with one perfect line from his post "Doing the right thing means nothing if you HAVE to do it."

Choice. Choosing not to do it. Choosing not to do something is as much of an action as choosing to do something. People often forget that. If you just *can't* kill them you are being forced. In Vault City when I had the option to give Curtis his teddy bear or tear it up there were concequences for ripping the bear(you get the wrench if you give it back to him and nothing otherwise). You might as well have been killing a child in this case because Curtis had no other friends.

"What does being able to kill children add to the game? Make it more "mature"?"

Yes, yes it does. It's all about how you approach the game in a world where children are killable. If I approach the game thinking "HAHAHA I'LL SHOOT EVERYONE I SEE ON THE SCREEN LOL!" obviously I won't think it's a very mature game. If I approach the idea of killing children maturely and realistically it's much more interesting.

You don't seem to want virtual children to be able to die in any way. Fine with me, don't shoot them but don't stop me from missing a shot on a raider and nailing a kid. A child's death can add tragedy(how will the parents react? assuming he isn't an orphan you might have two parents coming after you to get revenge)

[lomifeh]

You don't seem to want virtual children to be able to die in any way. Fine with me, don't shoot them but don't stop me from missing a shot on a raider and nailing a kid. A child's death can add tragedy(how will the parents react? assuming he isn't an orphan you might have two parents coming after you to get revenge)

The problem you have to avoid is the same one in books and movies. Death of children is often a cheap and in your face way to force an emotional reaction. Same with the specter of rape for female characters. If the story calls for it, well fine but to do it just for the sake of being "edgy" or "mature" is actually worse imho. It not only cheapens the actual impact when used correctly but can derail the story.

Also it comes down to the fact that this is entertainment and you have to balance that in the equation no matter what you do.

[Mandemon]

What ^ he said

[kira]

The problem you have to avoid is the same one in books and movies. Death of children is often a cheap and in your face way to force an emotional reaction. Same with the specter of rape for female characters. If the story calls for it, well fine but to do it just for the sake of being "edgy" or "mature" is actually worse imho. It not only cheapens the actual impact when used correctly but can derail the story.

Definitely. If anything feels forced it should not be in the game.

When I say the "tragedy" of a child's death I mean the child's death is tragic not that you need a 5 minute drama for the kid's death. Example: A man(you the insane ranger) shoot a child to death(such a thing is tragic), the parents come after you. This isn't forced into the game since you never have to kill children. Do not get me wrong though, I do not want sob stories surrounding rape and child killing. If the death of a child or rape is tragic to you it should be because you feel that way, not because the game makes you feel that way.

In Fallout whenever I accidentally killed a child I felt really bad about it, not because "oh no now I'm a "child killer" but because "dude i just accidentally shot a kid". Same thing when I sold Sulik to Metzger so I could afford to buy my car. I felt bad for Sulik and regretted doing that when I was much richer later. Thinking to myself "so that's what the life of a human being is worth? A couple hundred bucks and getting a car a bit quicker than I would have".

Perhaps the same way party members can be thieves some may even be rapists. Or pedophiles even. This is the Wasteland afterall. I highly doubt that not one man in the post apocalyptic world who kills for a living would not possibly be a rapist too.

Also it comes down to the fact that this is entertainment and you have to balance that in the equation no matter what you do

Of course. Law and Order Special Victims Unit is always about rape but they vary the rapes and don't spend their whole time on the drama or the investigation but rather try to even it out.

Once more do not get me wrong here. I'm not asking for Law and Order: Wasteland. I just think that the investigation and dialogue used to reach confessions in the show could be something to look at. The detectives lie to criminals, trick them and play mind games with them. Who doesn't love having a bit of murder(rape?) mystery in a game.

[SDF121]

Yes, completely agree! Make it edgy!

Make it edgy, you say?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZjX65NYVGM

The problem you have to avoid is the same one in books and movies. Death of children is often a cheap and in your face way to force an emotional reaction. Same with the specter of rape for female characters. If the story calls for it, well fine but to do it just for the sake of being "edgy" or "mature" is actually worse imho. It not only cheapens the actual impact when used correctly but can derail the story.

Agreed, I never knew why some people think that a game is automatically mature if it includes sex, violence, and vulgar language. If anything, having "mature" content simply for the sake of being "mature" or "edgy" generally works against the game as it tends to trivialize the serious tone or overall themes that a game may be attempt to portray. Of course, there is always room for such "mature" content in any game but it has to be handled appropriately and in such a way that it fits within the overall spirit of the game. To simply advocate that a game go 'over the top' with mature content would be rather unproductive while catering to a younger audience with their illusory notions of what makes a game "mature".

[lomifeh]

Definitely. If anything feels forced it should not be in the game.

When I say the "tragedy" of a child's death I mean the child's death is tragic not that you need a 5 minute drama for the kid's death. Example: A man(you the insane ranger) shoot a child to death(such a thing is tragic), the parents come after you. This isn't forced into the game since you never have to kill children. Do not get me wrong though, I do not want sob stories surrounding rape and child killing. If the death of a child or rape is tragic to you it should be because you feel that way, not because the game makes you feel that way.

Well it has go make sense. A random death like that would not do much for the story and could, in fact, overshadow the story. I think a random act like that could do more to derail the overall story very easily.

[SDF121]

Definitely. If anything feels forced it should not be in the game.

When I say the "tragedy" of a child's death I mean the child's death is tragic not that you need a 5 minute drama for the kid's death. Example: A man(you the insane ranger) shoot a child to death(such a thing is tragic), the parents come after you. This isn't forced into the game since you never have to kill children. Do not get me wrong though, I do not want sob stories surrounding rape and child killing. If the death of a child or rape is tragic to you it should be because you feel that way, not because the game makes you feel that way.

Well it has go make sense. A random death like that would not do much for the story and could, in fact, overshadow the story. I think a random act like that could do more to derail the overall story very easily.

Exactly, there is a difference between using a tragic event like the death of a child to convey a central theme that is essential to the games plot as opposed to simply inserting tragic events for shock value or to give the shallow impression that the game demands to be treated with respect because its "mature".

If the event has no significance to the games overall plot or the overall theme that the game attempts to portray, then you have to ask why even bother including it? After all, if the event is of no real significance to the game other than being an instance of "mature" that is simply sprinkled on the game for what is believed to be good measure, then it will more likely detract from the games overall message rather than enhancing it.

[Hellmaister]

What if we had an NPC hooker with three titties that only handles mutants with three arms? Her argument could be that those guys are the only ones who know how to treat a lady

[kira]

What if we had an NPC hooker with three titties that only handles mutants with three arms? Her argument could be that those guys are the only ones who know how to treat a lady

I'm suddenly reconsidering my opinion on plastic surgery being a bad thing.

To others saying "x and y into a game make it mature" or "x and y detract from maturity". If the content is added into the game correctly you shouldn't be worrying whether or not the content is mature or not. The content allows you to make mature or immature decisions. The content itself is not mature, high school kids joke about rape, killing theft and many other things. This isn't an ESRB hearing. You and you alone decide how mature to be.

I had some suggestions of what I'd like to see(and loose examples), if they don't fit, don't hammer them in.

If the event has no significance to the games overall plot or the overall theme that the game attempts to portray, then you have to ask why even bother including it

As I said in the post you quoted, I don't want them to insert a *tragic* death. I want the death to be tragic to me. I shot the kid to death. It's a tragedy. For characters to make choices and deal with the concequences. If you shoot a kid in the head and feel bad about because you FUCKING KILLED A KID and have to deal with the concequences(example: parents attack you). I hated accidentally killing children in Fallout. If I was a child in a post-apocalyptic world I'd probably pick pocket the hell out of people too(assuming I wasn't dead).

I think a random act like that could do more to derail the overall story very easily.

I also really don't see how a sidestory could derail the main story. Did you forgot about the GECK when you had to decide the fate of Redding? Or the whole affair with the three factions in San Francisco. Sidestories are just that. There to distract you from your main "quest" when you get bored(and of course to flesh out the world) and give a bit of variety.



PS. People don't seem to understand that when I say tragic or if I mention any emotional response it shouldn't be something like "Character x is sad now this whole rape affair sure got to him!". I want to feel bad IRL because I did something fucked up like blowing a kid up. Not because the game tells me to.

[lomifeh]

[
I also really don't see how a sidestory could derail the main story. Did you forgot about the GECK when you had to decide the fate of Redding? Or the whole affair with the three factions in San Francisco. Sidestories are just that. There to distract you from your main "quest" when you get bored(and of course to flesh out the world) and give a bit of variety.

PS. People don't seem to understand that when I say tragic or if I mention any emotional response it shouldn't be something like "Character x is sad now this whole rape affair sure got to him!". I want to feel bad IRL because I did something fucked up like blowing a kid up. Not because the game tells me to.

Well that isn't tragedy. What you are describing is wanting to feel an emotional response to game actions. It's one thing to have events evoke reactions, it's another to go down a path in the story based on something like shooting a child by accident. By it's nature you can't have it just be a random event, killing a kid in the game and having the game world react to the point where someone comes after you is by definition a true side quest.

As for side quests overshadowing main quests, think of it in a book with lots of subplots. There is always the danger of a subplot becoming more interesting than the main plot. If that happens the writer has two choices: 1. make the side plot into a main plot or drop the side plot. A side quest has a few purposes, they are there t o flesh out the world, provide some alternative content, insert breaks. They can also have effects on the main quests. Look at the loyalty quests in ME2 or Fallout 3 side quests. They have real effects on the game world.

I will give you an example of an event in a book happening and basically derailing the entire book to give you an example. The Thomas Covenant novels. In the first book the main character rapes a 16 year old girl. It's very graphic and made many people hate the main character enough that they stopped reading it. You do not want that to happen in the game. You don't want an action that pisses people off so much that they drop the game. Look at the ME3 fallout on the ending. Now imagine that happens in the first act of the game. It would destroy the game. That is why if you want to include killing a child in a game, and having it spawn events, you better be damn sure it is done correctly and well thought out. A game has to be taken in the terms of the society it is created in. Considering how society as a whole reacts to killing children it needs to be done right.

I see what you are saying and I don't think anyone is saying that evoking emotion is bad, but it needs to be done right. It shouldn't be cheap or contrived or use the same sorry tropes we see. Make me care, but make it happen in a way that isn't a cheap thrill. How about instead of killing the kid, you accidentally kill the kids parents? Now you orphaned a child which could have bigger effects. Do you take the kid in? Find him a home? Kill him too because you may have created an enemy? Give me that choice. Don't do the "oops i killed someone and now their loved ones want revenge" bs, that's been overdone.

[SDF121]

As I said in the post you quoted, I don't want them to insert a *tragic* death. I want the death to be tragic to me. I shot the kid to death. It's a tragedy. For characters to make choices and deal with the concequences. If you shoot a kid in the head and feel bad about because you FUCKING KILLED A KID and have to deal with the concequences(example: parents attack you). I hated accidentally killing children in Fallout. If I was a child in a post-apocalyptic world I'd probably pick pocket the hell out of people too(assuming I wasn't dead).

[...]

PS. People don't seem to understand that when I say tragic or if I mention any emotional response it shouldn't be something like "Character x is sad now this whole rape affair sure got to him!". I want to feel bad IRL because I did something fucked up like blowing a kid up. Not because the game tells me to.

I was primarily adding to Lomifeh's comments which stressed the importance of handling these matters, such as the unwarranted killing of children, in an appropriate fashion if they are to be included at all. The other point that I wanted to stress was that although these moments are intended to incite an emotional response on behalf of the player, I generally find them to be a contrived plot device that tends to fall flat (think MW3 or even Bioshock).

Although, if you really wanted to include the ever looming spectre of death around children in the game, I would much rather see a side quest where you are responsible for protecting a child, perhaps an orphan, from some other group whether they be raiders or cannibals responsible for his fathers death. For example, I always thought the dynamics of the situation surrounding the father and his son in 'The Road' to be quite fascinating. I think that a situation such as this would be more interesting and one that is just as capable of instilling guilt into the player should they fail.

Perhaps our concerns do not apply to your comments, Kira, but to the OP who calls for 'over the top' content. Again, I think that Plasmablaster states the matter between the two conceptions in a concise fashion...

My position is in line with most other people here. I'd like to add that I regard "maturity" as 2 different things:

1. The "perceptive" maturity type where it's used to describe swearing, sex, gore, etc. All these remain at the perceptive level of cognition. This is the shallow type of "maturity", what most people here don't care about (and rightfully so).

2. The "mindset" maturity type which is used to describe the mature mindset of dealing with the world. This means that content is such that gives room and allows freedom for the application of the strategies the player has developed to deal with his innermost issues of him being or becoming mature. His morality, his identity (and its development), his stratification of priorities, his perception of common sense, everything that a mature adult has to deal with in his everyday life and defines his character. This type of maturity is the "crucial" -at least according to me- type because it allows the player to reflect his own character within the game world, in a sense it is exactly this which allows him to feel that he really is in the game world. This second type of maturity is what I think most people ask for in Wasteland 2 (myself included).

Finally...

What's with the obsession of being able to kill children? Are we really that... messed up, in lack of better term? Why is it so required to be able to kill them?

I think Yahtzee raised some interesting points with respect to the matter...

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article ... You-People

and this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZjX65NYVGM

[Azriel]

It is obvious some of you have morale issues with the idea of adult mature subject matter in the game. I really do not understand why you are here, this game has already been stated to have AT LEAST an M rating. The majority of fans have clearly stated that they want the adult mature stuff in. If you think I am wrong, then you can put up a poll and see, but I think we all know what it will say. Seriously, the whole point of the game is MATURE CHOICES, if you find something objectionable, DO NOT DO IT IN THE GAME! How hard is that? Unless its a fixed script for story moment, nobody is forcing you to kill kids, take drugs, do prostitutes, capture/sell slaves, etc. Many of us have no problem with it and realize its just a game. You know, to do things we would never do in real life like MURDER PEOPLE which there are a bazillion games that allow that. We don't turn into rambo after playing call of duty, we aren't going to turn into rapists/murderers/thieves after playing wasteland 2. Just ignore what you find objectionable and move on, however that is not good enough for some, they don't even want the CHOICE to be there for ANYBODY. The logic boggles my mind.

[kira]

[
I also really don't see how a sidestory could derail the main story. Did you forgot about the GECK when you had to decide the fate of Redding? Or the whole affair with the three factions in San Francisco. Sidestories are just that. There to distract you from your main "quest" when you get bored(and of course to flesh out the world) and give a bit of variety.

PS. People don't seem to understand that when I say tragic or if I mention any emotional response it shouldn't be something like "Character x is sad now this whole rape affair sure got to him!". I want to feel bad IRL because I did something fucked up like blowing a kid up. Not because the game tells me to.

Well that isn't tragedy. What you are describing is wanting to feel an emotional response to game actions. It's one thing to have events evoke reactions, it's another to go down a path in the story based on something like shooting a child by accident. By it's nature you can't have it just be a random event, killing a kid in the game and having the game world react to the point where someone comes after you is by definition a true side quest.

As for side quests overshadowing main quests, think of it in a book with lots of subplots. There is always the danger of a subplot becoming more interesting than the main plot. If that happens the writer has two choices: 1. make the side plot into a main plot or drop the side plot. A side quest has a few purposes, they are there t o flesh out the world, provide some alternative content, insert breaks. They can also have effects on the main quests. Look at the loyalty quests in ME2 or Fallout 3 side quests. They have real effects on the game world.

I will give you an example of an event in a book happening and basically derailing the entire book to give you an example. The Thomas Covenant novels. In the first book the main character rapes a 16 year old girl. It's very graphic and made many people hate the main character enough that they stopped reading it. You do not want that to happen in the game. You don't want an action that pisses people off so much that they drop the game. Look at the ME3 fallout on the ending. Now imagine that happens in the first act of the game. It would destroy the game. That is why if you want to include killing a child in a game, and having it spawn events, you better be damn sure it is done correctly and well thought out. A game has to be taken in the terms of the society it is created in. Considering how society as a whole reacts to killing children it needs to be done right.

I see what you are saying and I don't think anyone is saying that evoking emotion is bad, but it needs to be done right. It shouldn't be cheap or contrived or use the same sorry tropes we see. Make me care, but make it happen in a way that isn't a cheap thrill. How about instead of killing the kid, you accidentally kill the kids parents? Now you orphaned a child which could have bigger effects. Do you take the kid in? Find him a home? Kill him too because you may have created an enemy? Give me that choice. Don't do the "oops i killed someone and now their loved ones want revenge" bs, that's been overdone.

We agree then. I admit my example was rather generic.

[Crazy Wolf]

...Seriously, the whole point of the game is MATURE CHOICES, if you find something objectionable, DO NOT DO IT IN THE GAME! ...

This. I don't want any character to be invincible, I don't want any character to be incorruptible, I don't want any character to be perfect. I want a game world populated by realistic people, who might be very strong or very well guarded, who might have a very strong moral code, who might be incredibly good at almost everything they do, but are still ultimately human.

Having children in the wastelands adds realism, remaining as evidence that humans do what humans do, and that DNA continues to propagate itself. Having children in the wasteland be invincible destroys realism. Hell, it'd be more realistic if you didn't have children in the first place, and explained it away with some sort of recent sterility-causing chemical contamination or something. Either treat children like they're any other human, or don't include them.

Similar opinions exist for drugs, theft, prostitution, violence, lying, and other things commonly viewed as crimes (depending on jurisdiction) or vices. Ideally your engagement in these things can be monitored much like a "reputation/karma" system, so that if you're a known teetotaler or drunkard or junkie, people will react differently (being a drunk or junkie might positively affect some group's opinion of you, the same type of group that would frown on those who abstain completely). Maybe whoring about can establish you as "one of the guys", but make the women who learn about it view you poorly? Not sure how much we want this society to mirror American society, and if so, at what time period, or with Cultural Revolution X or Great Awakening Z altering it.

Hopefully, the reputation system takes into account witnesses, and ideally how much of a blabbermouth and/or how trustworthy the witnesses are. Not a *high* priority in my mind, but let's see what the developers can come up with.

[Desertcat]

Player reputation is good, but it should be handled more realistically than in Fallout 1&2. If you dig up a grave or kill a kid in one corner of the world map it doesn't make sense for absolutely everyone, everywhere on the world map, to be aware of that fact. Some kind of realistic epidemic propagation model could be used depending on your actions. If you have a habbit of killing and raping whole towns and leaving just a few alive to tell the tale, that information should spread like wildfire. But if you dig up a grave at night in an abandoned cementery, nobody should be able, realistically speaking, to find out.

Or the "karma" of your ghoulish behavior plays out in your life for all to see (ala Dark Side Corruption, or "The Shakes" from "Book of Eli."). There are ways that your unseen (good or bad or other) behavior are detectable to others.

[Gearhead]

My take on "mature content" is that it needs to see a purpose. I've never come out of a movie or game and thought "that was okay, but what it really needed was more heads being chopped off, a few more f-bombs, and maybe a nipple or two. I'm not offended by these things, but neither do I like them to be sprinkled liberally over something just to make it more mature or edgier. If they're needed for storytelling purposes, fine. If they're just thrown in to get a "hurr hurr" reaction, then it smacks of lazy design.

[Azriel]

My take on "mature content" is that it needs to see a purpose. I've never come out of a movie or game and thought "that was okay, but what it really needed was more heads being chopped off, a few more f-bombs, and maybe a nipple or two. I'm not offended by these things, but neither do I like them to be sprinkled liberally over something just to make it more mature or edgier. If they're needed for storytelling purposes, fine. If they're just thrown in to get a "hurr hurr" reaction, then it smacks of lazy design.

Having media disneyed to not offend anyone or to reach a larger market is just as bad or worse. Take the remakes in movies, robocop was a violent, twisted movie that is rated R, has extreme violence, language, drug use, gangs, (not sure if there was any sex/nudity), etc anyway they are remaking it...and it will be PG-13. 0_o, WTH? Another one that makes me rage, is they are remaking hellraiser...and again turning it into PG-13! Seriously, HELLRAISER, violence, sex, demons, torture.... it will be so disney. Do you honestly think those movies will be any good after hollywood gets done with them or be as remembered? No, they will be horrible and mere shadows of what the originals were. Why do you think the original movies are cult classics? Its because they didn't hold back at this time, this was a time when they had a LOT more creative freedom and why people LOVE the originals, I want that in this game, I want the creative freedom to flow and not be hampered by people who have issues with mature themes. We don't want another fallout 3 safe game, we want to go back to fallout 1/2 MATURE games. I think some people have no idea why people are funding this game, Maturity/adult situations is what I am fairly confident is what most of us want.

Take fallout 3 vs fallout 1/2, while I enjoyed fallout 3, it does not hold a candle to Fallout 1/2 because there is very little roleplaying (the limited good evil choices, whoopie/sarcasm), but mostly the world has near zero adult/mature situations except for the token ones. This is funny, because when fallout 3 was being developed, this was the question that kept coming up and bethesda just ignored it, or lied like a politation. Look at the top fan rated questions. Look at the NUMBER ONE question that they asked. Why do you think they asked this? Its because its what the old players want! Look at the top three questions that was voted on to ask bethesda.

1) Which of the following, if any, will be featured in Fallout3; Romance, Sex, Homosexuality, Nudity, Prostitution, Slavery, Cannibalism, Children, Child killings, drugs, addictions? And of the things that won’t be featured, can you explain why they won’t be included in the game?

2) Are children and otherwise non essential or non-quest related NPC’s vulnerable or invulnerable to accidental or purposeful (deadly) harm? And how about quest essential people? Please elaborate as much as you can, especially on why you choose to do it that way.

3) Could you outline your thoughts on the matter of ensuring that choices and consequences provided by the various quests within your game are crafted so as to be more nonlinear than simply the superficial choice between “good, bad and neutral”/”affirmative, negative and nothing?” Also, will there be other aspects to choices in Fallout 3? Political? Philosophical? Exactly how far will you go with the player’s moral freedom, the “gray” solutions?

We all know how fallout 3 turned out. If you liked it, power too you, but it was such a disappointment for the old fallout fans. Another IP that was ruined to make it safe and sell to the masses. I don't want another SAFE game, I want an old school ass kicking very adult/mature game that will be talked about for years to come as a cult classic BECAUSE it was willing to push the envelope once again and be edgy/sexy/and dangerous like the games of old.

On a related note, I wonder if we can have Brian answer these same questions for wasteland 2.

[Gearhead]

Whenever someone talks of pushing the envelope, I always wonder at what point the would decide to stop pushing.

Anyway, F3 didn't seem all that "safe" to me. It was plenty gritty and violent (no less so than the first two. Unless you're playing a toned-down release or something, there was lots of blood, exploding heads, dismembered bodies on chains, etc.) I didn't notice a particular lack of harsh language, and there was more sex and skin than in F1. There was slavery and cannibalism a-plenty, and really the only thing that was deliberately toned down that I can think of was the fact that I couldn't gun down a cavern complex full of kids: I wasn't particularly upset that that option had been denied me. I'm not for Disney-fying things, but it's also not necessary to lay the stuff on with a trowel. Again, as long as it serves a purpose and is part of good storytelling, I'm fine with it. It just doesn't raise the quality of a game/movie/whatever on its own, and does not make up for poor directing/writing/designing.

[Azriel]

Whenever someone talks of pushing the envelope, I always wonder at what point the would decide to stop pushing.

Anyway, F3 didn't seem all that "safe" to me. It was plenty gritty and violent (no less so than the first two. Unless you're playing a toned-down release or something, there was lots of blood, exploding heads, dismembered bodies on chains, etc.) I didn't notice a particular lack of harsh language, and there was more sex and skin than in F1. There was slavery and cannibalism a-plenty, and really the only thing that was deliberately toned down that I can think of was the fact that I couldn't gun down a cavern complex full of kids: I wasn't particularly upset that that option had been denied me. I'm not for Disney-fying things, but it's also not necessary to lay the stuff on with a trowel. Again, as long as it serves a purpose and is part of good storytelling, I'm fine with it. It just doesn't raise the quality of a game/movie/whatever on its own, and does not make up for poor directing/writing/designing.

Fallout 3 was a joke. The blood, guts, exploding body parts, dismemberment is the same bs bethesda used to try and say why fallout 3 was mature/adult. It was complete BS then and its BS now. That's not mature or a mature situation, that is just violence that has been done in a bazillion game before. Nothing special there. For the other stuff, sex, slavery, cannibilism? The token mature themes? Yea, what a laugh. The token prostitute who you pay to "sleep" with. Oh please, she literally says sleep and I don't even think she used the word sex at all. It was like a victorian novel that you had to read between the lines to understand what she is saying. Cannibalism? yea, ok. Didn't really see the big deal about it, you met one group who drinks blood and you could eat corpses. It really didn't seem to have much of an impact in the game really, nor did they have any cannibilistic quest except the token blood drinkers who are really just a bunch of misunderstood kids. Yea, soooooo dark and edgy./sarcasm. Slavery? Oh, you mean *again*, the TOKEN slaver and its slaver group. Could you buy a slave, nope (at least I didn't find a way to do it), could you join them (not from what I remember), so what purpose was it for? Oh yea, a enemy to fight or get money from. What about all those slaves...oh, can't do anything with them or capture slaves...yea ok. So, token slaver whose only purpose is really to be an enemy you kill. Soooo pushing the envelope bethesda. I am glad you are fine with this disney stuff, but I, and many others want way more than this disney BS generation.