So I guess killing kids is pretty much off the menu this time...

[The Youth Counselor]

Originally Posted by Obnoxious Frog

My beef with immortal children in games isn't a moral one. Generally speaking, I don't go around hosing civs in games for the fun of it. The problem is game developers get some sort of perverse glee out of making kids as annoying as humanly possible and then taking away your ability to do anything about it.

Seriously, if you betray me to a criminal organization, threaten to spray me with bullets, or otherwise actively seek my demise, expect the wrath. I don't care how old you are.

You ninja'd me to this. I don't enjoy killing children. I understand the moral and possible legal concerns of adding killable children into games. But lately children in video games have been as annoying, evil, and sometimes hideous as characters can be. I think most of it doesn't stem from developers trying to taunt us, but in limitations. They may not have the finances to pay a child actor so they settle for a high pitched grown woman who can't pass off as kid to a To Catch a Predator guest. They may not have as much data children as they do adults to model and animate them properly (Very apparent in the monstrosities seen in Fallout 3 and Heavy Rain.) The writers may just not understand children that well. These things contribute to unlikable characters.

The greatest thing the modding community had done for Fallout 3 was coming up with the mod/patch that makes the children killable.

[Farouk]

Originally Posted by 3nails4you

People seem to take anything and want to get up in arms and protest about it. DX1, and 2 for that matter, did not get enough attention for anyone to really care about the ability to kill children.

Not enough attention? Deus Ex won several Game of the Year awards in the year 2000. 2000, that's the year Diablo 2 was released, just to put stuff into perspective. At least in Germany Deus Ex was pretty big.
Yes, you could roast a bunch of little uniformed school girls with a flamethrower in Invisble War. They turned crispy black after running around on fire, screaming. It was a total dick move. Possible dick moves are a strong part of Deus Ex: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09vVF-Hvykg
One probably didn't do such crazy things on his first serious play through. But such possibilities are part of the love for Deus Ex.
Germany has always been pretty anal about video game violence. Invisible War was released after the pretty big Littleton-inspired German Erfurt school shooting, which tensed the situation in Germany even further. Yet Deus Ex and Invisible War both were uncut.That's because such a single scene is not overly important. In Germany it's the whole package that counts. And in the case of a proper Deus Ex game, the whole package redeems such sick possibilities. Simply because it is so much more, with its non-lethal possibilities, the different character reactions to killing and not killing.

So: I think killing kids in a game is fine (as it was in both DX games) as long as the game is "mature". Mature as in not being an action gore fest. Nobody could make the accusations that killing kids was a cheap selling point in DX or IW. The gameplay and story possibilities were far too rich for that.

I see NO reason not to include killable kids. Else DX:HR will just take another step into the direction of typically "dumbed down" console action shooter: A game without enough substance to redeem its improper parts.

[MechBFP]

Originally Posted by Farouk

Not enough attention? Deus Ex won several Game of the Year awards in the year 2000. 2000, that's the year Diablo 2 was released, just to put stuff into perspective. At least in Germany Deus Ex was pretty big.
Yes, you could roast a bunch of little uniformed school girls with a flamethrower in Invisble War. They turned crispy black after running around on fire, screaming. It was a total dick move. Possible dick moves are a strong part of Deus Ex: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09vVF-Hvykg
One probably didn't do such crazy things on his first serious play through. But such possibilities are part of the love for Deus Ex.
Germany has always been pretty anal about video game violence. Invisible War was released after the pretty big Littleton-inspired German Erfurt school shooting, which tensed the situation in Germany even further. Yet Deus Ex and Invisible War both were uncut.That's because such a single scene is not overly important. In Germany it's the whole package that counts. And in the case of a proper Deus Ex game, the whole package redeems such sick possibilities. Simply because it is so much more, with its non-lethal possibilities, the different character reactions to killing and not killing.

So: I think killing kids in a game is fine (as it was in both DX games) as long as the game is "mature". Mature as in not being an action gore fest. Nobody could make the accusations that killing kids was a cheap selling point in DX or IW. The gameplay and story possibilities were far too rich for that.

I see NO reason not to include killable kids. Else DX:HR will just take another step into the direction of typically "dumbed down" console action shooter: A game without enough substance to redeem its improper parts.

This post sums up all of my own opinions on the subject quite nicely. Well done Farouk.

[Dead-Eye]

Yes, killing kids in a Deus Ex game is a choice and ideally should carry with it a consequence. Rape on the other hand was not a choice in Deus Ex and should not be a choice in DX3. Really I would think the Devs had some issues if they had that feature in the game, or are trying to get the game banned for publicity reasons.

In short, Rape is bad and should not be an option as it was not in the original.
Killing kids is bad but you should still have the option as it was in the original.

[Angel-A]

How do I put this
No one wants to rape women and children in DX, okay? OKAY?!

Not a soul here was wanting for the option to do it; rape is nothing less than foul and sick. Can we please, for God's sake, drop this subject? It's giving me mental images that I can't unthink.


Now, then, here's my argument for why children should not be invulnerable:
If kids are invul because they're unarmed and harmless, one can make the argument that unarmed, harmless adult NPCs should be invul, too. You have no reason to attack non-combatants, why not make it so the only people that can be killed are enemy soldiers?
Do you see where I'm going with this? It destroys player choice and ruins the suspension of disbelief knowing God-Mode people are running around. In DX, I've accidentally gunned innocent people, both kids and adults. I feel horrible when that happens because DX feels damn real when you're playing it, and I play it on that basis. If I can't treat situations in a real way, everything feels fake and detached and I have much less emotion for what I'm doing.
Let's put together a scenario: Adam Jensen must clear out a room full of grunts looking to kill him, but, an innocent kid happens to have gotten caught up and is trapped with them. What do we do?
If we have blessed and immortal children, just throw in a few grenades, destroy the enemy, and the kiddie walks out hunky-dory, fine-n'-dandy. The game feels unrealistic, I have no moral decisions to make, it's just a kill fest. What I do does not seem to matter in the world.
Now, if all young'ns are vulnerable to attack, we have an entirely different situation! I have to carefully think out what I'm going to do, I have to go in and kill these grunts, but if I'm not careful, a child will die. Very down-to-Earth, serious dilemma. I feel like I'm "in" this world, these people are real and I am responsible for what happens. I can't go in guns blazing, because if I do, innocents die. Having to think it though would push me toards making moral moves.
Having kids that are invul for the sake of invul-ness prevents me from making moral choices and dehumanizes people in the DX world. Having all NPCs equally vulnerable encourages serious thought on what I am doing. DX was ABOUT player choice, the game wasn't 100% superglued to a series of set "good" actions, you could choose good or bad, and when you did choose bad, it never scolded you for doing something that wasn't fully saintly. You are your own moral scale, taking that away leaves no room for your own judgement.
I think it's fair to say that on serious playthoughs, most go for the better options. Sure I had the ability to kill essentially everybody in sight, but is that what I did? Of course not. Why would I want to do that? I'm not going to take all the bastard moves just because I can. No one does that because they're going to feel bad about shooting up people that didn't deserve to die in the game.

[IOOI]

A bit OT but I would love to see a Carmaggedon HD. *dreams*

[pringlepower]

eh maybe they could work in the no kids thing storyline-wise
there wouldn't be kids in sarif
late night detroit during a time frequented by riots seems a bit dangerous (and since the economy's just chipper there'll probably be less homeless? i dunno)
and Heng Sha in Shanghai seems like a relatively well-off place, built on the prosperity of human augmentation. and if not, it's full of seedy nightclubs?
i dunno, my fail at explanation

[JackShandy]

Got to say, guys, there's no reason why kids would even appear in DE3, unless it's bring-your-daughter-to-work-day at sarif industries. This argument is crazy.

[K.Karisma]

Although I sort of agree that the choice should be there if children were in the game, in this day and age I think any dev would be wanting to avoid any such controversy. The other DX's were sort of under-the-radar enough to be missed out the crosshairs of controversy and bad press with games like GTA being targetted, but I don't think it'd be ignored this time around.

On another note, I find from myself and my friends that in general people just find some kind of pleasure out of doing messed up things in games. One example being in a 'recent Western game', in an act of revenge you can kill members of a certain mans family, you dont have to, you gain no in-game reward/punishment for doing so, but after doing so, a few made comments along the lines of, ''I killed the bastards entire family'', followed by descriptions of how so, with a trend of the act being committed in the most brutal and painful way possible in the game.

Just thought i'd add that in.

[Obnoxious Frog]

Well said, Angel-A. Bravo and then some.

Originally Posted by Angel-A

DX was ABOUT player choice, the game wasn't 100% superglued to a serious of set "good" actions, you could choose good or bad, and when you did choose bad, it never scolded you for doing something that wasn't fully saintly. You are your own moral scale, taking that away leaves no room for your own judgement.

Couldn't have said that better. This is what scares me with all the talk of wanting consequences to actions. It sounds good in theory, but isn't usually implemented in a choice friendly way. The moral compass systems some games feature are a prime example. Things like that don't promote choice so much as railroad your decision-making process. Much like invulnerable NPCs, as you pointed out.

Yeah, I maced Pan and cracked him with a police baton for his treachery. When he wakes up, he'll have a new perspective on double-crossing people. Sometimes, you don't get away with it. I probably turned his life around, or at least did my part. If he'd pulled a weapon, I'd have gone further (Lookin' at you, MaCready!). Self defense and all that. As far as consequences to the scenario would usually go, though, the game saw me whack a kid and so I'm an evil bastard and will be tarred and feathered later.

[beastosterone]

Originally Posted by JackShandy

Got to say, guys, there's no reason why kids would even appear in DE3, unless it's bring-your-daughter-to-work-day at sarif industries. This argument is crazy.

Why? Can you elaborate? Did you play DX1 AND 2? There were kids in those.

[JackShandy]

I can elaborate: Deus 1 and 2 had kids, sure, but they were in the vast, vast minority. Hardly any games have kids in them (excluding games with kids as the heroes, obviously). There's technical reasons for it, I think. You have to make a different skeleton or something, because they're smaller? I'm not an expert. Either way, it's usually a safe bet to assume that kids won't appear in any given adult game.

More than that, even, there's no real reason why adam jensen should meet kids (apart from some world building, I suppose). Kids just aren't the focus here. And if I'm right and putting kids in a game requires some extra technical legwork, why should they?

[Helegad]

It all adds to the realism. Kids should not be god-mode in DX3. It would break the chain seen in DX 1 and 2 where we could kill them.

[beastosterone]

You didn't elaborate at all you just asked me a bunch of questions.

- no it is not technically (wtf) harder to create kid npcs
- just because other games don't have them neither should the new DX? the hell does that have to do with anything
- kids aren't the focus but neither were they in dx1 or 2 - they're just there to populate the world, create quests, situations, setting, etc

[rokstrombo]

Originally Posted by 3nails4you

Well, I was also eleven years old at the time.

Obviously none of it is real...I think I went over that in some painful amount of detail. For me, however, video games can be much like a testing ground for our moral systems. Video games (as well as books, movies, television, etc.) is NOT solely entertainment; no, the ones with the best stories and setups can also provide a great deal of introspection. Obviously, killing someone in a video game is nothing to get torn up about (maybe if you are 11) as it doesn't hurt anyone whatsoever. It isn't about UNATCO being a just cause, or the NSF being a just cause; what I think it is about (as I stated earlier, maybe do another read-through?) is the condition of our hearts and minds. If we are playing games and find ourselves hatefully murdering people, it may be a good time for a break, or to take up some martial arts classes. If we can just play the game and have fun, then I think that's perfectly fine. As you said, people should decide how to act in the game, and some can kill children in the game and not do it out of anger or hate, and that's all good, as it is just what they are doing and it will weigh on their conscience appropriately (in-game consequences would also be great). However, some things are not doable if not out of evil thoughts (e.g. rape), which is why I brought the whole thing up. Killing does not have to be murder, but rape is ALWAYS rape.

EDIT: Going to avoid misunderstanding here preemptively. I do not mean that if you are angry and kill children you should stop and if not, continue...if these sorts of things don't make you double take or think twice, I say seek professional help.

I think I agree with your argument, however my argument was that the condition of your heart and mind is dictated in part by the story of the game (which is obviously not real). This story may potentially allow someone to virtually kill without conscience. By choosing to experience this story, the player is choosing to imagine circumstances for which the virtual killings would be morally justifiable (or not), thereby allowing themselves the experience of virtual killing without the guilt. If UNATCO is the justification for the killing, what is the justification for playing the game in the first place? More specifically, does the ability to virtually kill people add to the fun of the experience, and why?

I suggest that you enjoy virtual killing.

Originally Posted by 3nails4you

I am totally for NOT having children killable, and would not kill them.

Originally Posted by 3nails4you

It isn't about UNATCO being a just cause, or the NSF being a just cause; what I think it is about (as I stated earlier, maybe do another read-through?) is the condition of our hearts and minds.

You have implied that you currently don't want children to be killable in video games because some players may do so out of hate or anger, yet the possibility that players may do the same to adults is acceptable ("If we can just play the game and have fun, then I think that's perfectly fine"). The virtual kids obviously do not need your protection (thanks for clearing that up, in painful detail). My argument was that if the kids are no more real than the adults, why make the distinction? You are imposing a double standard.

Your point about rape in video games is well taken, but that isn't what I was addressing in my earlier post (maybe do another read.... nah I won't go there ).

[JackShandy]

Originally Posted by beastosterone

You didn't elaborate at all you just asked me a bunch of questions.

- no it is not technically (wtf) harder to create kid npcs
- just because other games don't have them neither should the new DX? the hell does that have to do with anything
- kids aren't the focus but neither were they in dx1 or 2 - they're just there to populate the world, create quests, situations, setting, etc

-It's not harder to create kid NPCs than adult NPCs- but once you're making a world full of Adult NPCs, kids are different enough that they need to be made separately, which takes up resources, as much as making a new enemy type or anything like that.
-"Deus Ex did it" isn't a good enough reason for everything, Ashpolt tells me. You're not really giving any reason why kids should be in the game.

I don't know how much more I can elaborate on "Deus Ex 3 doesn't need kids". Seems pretty straightforward. If you want more detail, "Deus Ex does not seem to require the presence of children in order to advance it's plot, setting, or gameplay, besides as a device to add small amounts of colour or variety to the NPC characters." I'm not really seeing any huge reasons why they should expend the resources to make kids- reasons that would be worth angering the moral watchdogs(if they make them kill-able) or the freedom-loving fans(if they don't).

I don't know the plot, obviously, but there really isn't a place for kids in some game-worlds. I wouldn't expect to see a kid hanging around a bunch of protestors outside sarif industries, or inside a seedy bar in neo shanghai, or in any of the locations we've seen, really. Besides, it'd be way past their bed-time.

[beastosterone]

You're going on a lot about these "resources" - trust me, it's not a big deal.

-"Deus Ex did it" isn't a good enough reason for everything, Ashpolt tells me. You're not really giving any reason why kids should be in the game.

I didn't say "Deus Ex did it". And I gave reasons why kids could/should be in the game (and thus killable). What better way to show the state of the world than in our completely innocent, un-controlled children? I can't speak for everyone, but those homeless kids in DX1 went a lot further in selling me on the bleakness of the world than some bum walking around singing songs did.


Bottom line though; removal of children due to some arbitrary rule of 'no killing kids in games anymore' strikes me as pointless and troubling. If they want to add kids, and if they have situations where they might want kids, they should be able to do that without modern society forcing them to create an adult-only world that doesn't make sense.

It's not a big deal. Just sayin'

[Sotsiak]

Originally Posted by JackShandy

-It's not harder to create kid NPCs than adult NPCs- but once you're making a world full of Adult NPCs, kids are different enough that they need to be made separately, which takes up resources, as much as making a new enemy type or anything like that.
-"Deus Ex did it" isn't a good enough reason for everything, Ashpolt tells me. You're not really giving any reason why kids should be in the game.

I don't know how much more I can elaborate on "Deus Ex 3 doesn't need kids". Seems pretty straightforward. If you want more detail, "Deus Ex does not seem to require the presence of children in order to advance it's plot, setting, or gameplay, besides as a device to add small amounts of colour or variety to the NPC characters." I'm not really seeing any huge reasons why they should expend the resources to make kids- reasons that would be worth angering the moral watchdogs(if they make them kill-able) or the freedom-loving fans(if they don't).

I don't know the plot, obviously, but there really isn't a place for kids in some game-worlds. I wouldn't expect to see a kid hanging around a bunch of protestors outside sarif industries, or inside a seedy bar in neo shanghai, or in any of the locations we've seen, really. Besides, it'd be way past their bed-time.

Kids were pretty useful in the previous Deus ex games. In Deus ex 1 you could learn passwords, areas, and other information. Or they were just whining like in the Catacombs. In Deus ex 2 we had a whole school of them, and this school was a big part of the game.

In other words Deus ex seems to require children because it is a realistic and immersive video game. Children have a fair part of the general population and could have a bigger if they didn't die everyday like ants.
Also I am talking about the game as a DX game, not a standard modern shooter.

[Streakfury]

Originally Posted by beastosterone

Yeah - you could kill kids in DX1 and 2.

Like in the school you could shoot up all the little school girls then lie them bottoms up on the couches so you could see up their skirts.

Classic. Disturbing, but classic.

[beastosterone]

That's without even mentioning the nude mods

[Zakka]

Originally Posted by Angel-A

How do I put this
No one wants to rape women and children in DX, okay? OKAY?!

Not a soul here was wanting for the option to do it; rape is nothing less than foul and sick. Can we please, for God's sake, drop this subject? It's giving me mental images that I can't unthink.

Conversation system:

1. Joke
2. Be nice
3. Bribe
4. Rape

[Obnoxious Frog]

I haven't laughed that hard in a long time. Many thanks!

[3nails4you]

Originally Posted by rokstrombo

I think I agree with your argument, however my argument was that the condition of your heart and mind is dictated in part by the story of the game (which is obviously not real). This story may potentially allow someone to virtually kill without conscience. By choosing to experience this story, the player is choosing to imagine circumstances for which the virtual killings would be morally justifiable (or not), thereby allowing themselves the experience of virtual killing without the guilt. If UNATCO is the justification for the killing, what is the justification for playing the game in the first place? More specifically, does the ability to virtually kill people add to the fun of the experience, and why?

I suggest that you enjoy virtual killing.




You have implied that you currently don't want children to be killable in video games because some players may do so out of hate or anger, yet the possibility that players may do the same to adults is acceptable ("If we can just play the game and have fun, then I think that's perfectly fine"). The virtual kids obviously do not need your protection (thanks for clearing that up, in painful detail). My argument was that if the kids are no more real than the adults, why make the distinction? You are imposing a double standard.

Your point about rape in video games is well taken, but that isn't what I was addressing in my earlier post (maybe do another read.... nah I won't go there ).

A. My point about rape was part of a different conversation entirely.
B. When I said that I would be all for nonkillable children, honestly the only point was that I wouldn't be killing any children anyways, so if they wanted to make them invincible/absent, it wouldn't affect my gameplay any further than in did in any of the Half-Life games.
C. I wasn't making a distinction as far as children and adults...I was making a distinction on justified vs. non-justified killings. If I were to walk up to, say, that pottery shop owner in Hong Kong and shoot her through the head, I think that (video game wise), that would be just as bad as killing a child. When I play video games, I like to (and think it is good to) act like I would in real life if I were in those situations, and I would certainly not be running around cutting down either innocent civilians OR children, but would be working for the cause I believed to be right (not that I myself think UNATCO has a just cause [well, it didn't, but you know what I mean, since it is fake], but were I in the situation that my character was in, I would follow my country and the service I was sworn into and be willing to fight the terrorists. Again, just an example).

Really, my whole point is the heart, and these distinctions about just causes and what not are pointless. It is the condition of the heart that really matters, and honestly, some have more capacity than others. I can kill people in video games, if to an end, without any anger or hatred behind it, which is really what I am stressing. If people can't do that, if it causes negative emotions to arise, they should stop. It does cause negative emotions in me in video games to kill innocent children, therefore I do not do that. This is my point.

[mad_red]

Originally Posted by Mr. K

I wouldn't worry about Square Enix's influence on this game, as there is none. Square seems perfectly content to throw money at EidosM and let them do their thing.

Even so, there may be some influence, if only in a roundabout way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6VYcvGknH4
At 1:36 Prettyface starts talking about how the trailer got its looks.

Not that I'm worried or anything. His hairdo looks better than mine. Lemme check Yep, still nothing.

[Ceri]

Originally Posted by Angel-A

How do I put this
No one wants to rape women and children in DX, okay? OKAY?!

Yeah! Men are where it's at!