Add children to ESO?

Digiman

Yes, add them

I literally see no point in not adding them and making them killable. This is a game about demon worship, fantasy and cultural difference and WAR!

Even then you have games like SWTOR, DCUO and even WoW with children. So there is no excuse not to add them.

seanvwolf

No, don't add them

Antiquity wrote: »

So then, you're saying that video games can't be thought of as a form of art, in the same vein as books? Some books -do- include indiscriminate killing as a plot device. Same with movies. This game has many RPers, and maybe they would want to use it as such.

There's a difference between using the death of children as story device versus a choice the audience gets to make.

As a story device, the reader is given to witness some external conflict or internal character's seriousness and depravity, to escalate the situation and to elevate tension and emotional response. LotF (as sited earlier) had deaths to children, but they were not indiscriminate and was very limited (can only remember one death). The books I do remember that had depicted meaningless abuse to children were also, in my opinion, sick.

Allowing the option for players to destroy children ingame is less like the above example and more like an example of "Choose-your-own Adventure" where every choice possibility revolves around the indiscriminate death of a child. Any reasonable person who ever saw anyone with such a book, no matter how old they were and how fantastic it would seem, would automatically think that the person was a depraved whackjob. And rightfully so.

Roechacca

I'm calling my therapist ...

seanvwolf

No, don't add them

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Now socially the last two are unacceptable, and I personally don't want them (yeah, I didn't use that mod in Skyrim, didn't even know it existed)(wouldn't have interested me if I had known).

I just wanted to tell you I found this response out of place as your signature features phrases from a series whose initial badguy is introduced as a pedophilic murderer of small boys and whose protagonist is trained by young women raised from childhood in a torture chamber.

AlexDougherty

Yes, add them

seanvwolf wrote: »

show previous quotes

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Now socially the last two are unacceptable, and I personally don't want them (yeah, I didn't use that mod in Skyrim, didn't even know it existed)(wouldn't have interested me if I had known).

I just wanted to tell you I found this response out of place as your signature features phrases from a series whose initial badguy is introduced as a pedophilic murderer of small boys and whose protagonist is trained by young women raised from childhood in a torture chamber.

Wait a second, yes the initial villian was sick, but I didn't relate to him, I related to Richard and Zedd (and yes to Kahlan a bit as well).

But Richard wasn't trained from childhood in a Torture chamber, he had a normal childhood. Kahlan had a childhood that could be viewed in that light, but that wasn't gone into detail (thank god).

There were macabre scenes, but these highlighted the depravity of the bad guys, I personally viewed it as either unpleasant realism (things like that did happen during middle ages) with the heroes basically enduring it.

Also it's different to read about things happening and having you in game character (which used to be called Avatars at one point) do those things. In Skyrim I just gritted my teeth and avoided the kids (they were okay in te background, just irritating up close). But they did make the place feel populated by communities, admittedly they should have had Children for all the races, but oh well.

seanvwolf

No, don't add them

AlexDougherty wrote: »

But Richard wasn't trained from childhood in a Torture chamber, he had a normal childhood. Kahlan had a childhood that could be viewed in that light, but that wasn't gone into detail (thank god).

I didn't say Richard was trained from childhood in a torture chamber... I said the trainers were raised from childhood in a torture chamber, which is not incorrect.

Zorrashi

Yes, add them

Digiman wrote: »

I literally see no point in not adding them and making them killable. This is a game about demon worship, fantasy and cultural difference and WAR!

Even then you have games like SWTOR, DCUO and even WoW with children. So there is no excuse not to add them.

Except that the game is not just about demon worship, war, fantasy and cultural differences.
Tamriel may be set in a fantasy (i.e not real) setting, but it is by all means, not without its own mythos, lore and logic.
The war is being fought over ideologies (and a crave for power. But so is every war.) on how best to attain and rule Cyrodil and potentially all of Tamriel. The cultures have their own set of moral code and traditions that face the difficulties of assimilation or taking into consideration the cultures of other races.
Most of the time, the NPCs you kill are either animals or civil enemies like bandits, undead or enemy faction members. Do you know why you kill them (as far as the game is concerned)? Because it benefits the respective society that you are aligned with. You are basically being a good Samaritan for the great majority of the game save for the few inconsequential NPCs that you have the option to kill/leave in a world of torture/turned into the officials.
Even when the justice system is introduced, where you can kill civilians, it still stands that as far the game is concerned, those people that you kill are still under the protection of the society that the game world has set in place. Hence why killing any of your own kind is illegal.

A game with even virtual violence is not an excuse to add every potential aspect into the game without thought. If it is added, it is because they expect it raise revenue, not because "it is a game". Some games like Dante's Inferno, can have that amount of 'dark themed' content to such a degree because it was marketed for that particular audience.

In an MMO, where it is not just one-person who gets to experience the game. Other people and their feelings should be taken into consideration, and if the subject at hand is a delicate one such as this, then yes, it may be better to forgo the inclusion of killable children if a great amount of the populace has problems with it.

In many ways, the subject about adding children is almost as much about human consideration as it is about game design and/or implementation in this case.

Gidorick

Yes, add them

Zorrashi wrote: »

...
In many ways, the subject about adding children is almost as much about human consideration as it is about game design and/or implementation in this case.

Well thought out post but I think it's simpler than that. Will adding un-killable children be beneficial to the game? I think it would. I think it would open up quest possibilities and make the game more robust, immersive and sympathetic.

Would there be any negative consequences to adding un-killable children to the game? I can't think of any aside from some minor annoyance because some of the kids would be annoying but really that just means the game is more immersive!

What game benefits would there be to being able to kill those children? There would be quest and justice possibilities but killing children is a more grievous crime than killing adults. I would think paying a bounty for killing a child wouldn't be enough of a punishment and that killing a child would have to have a more permanent impact on the player, but this wouldn't really be a possible in an MMO.

Now, the better question is would there be any negative consequences to adding killable children to the game? Without question, yes. There would be players that would relish in killing the children of Tamriel and it would almost become a sort of perversion, and this would no doubt bring on some negative attention to ESO.

I personally think killable children would be completely tasteless to have in an MMO and having un-killable children has a precedence in TES. So the argument should ONLY be about having children or not having children in ESO, their kill-ability should not even part of the conversation.

Bouvin

Yes, add them

But only if we can make them our slaves in the Justice System. I'd like to have a little band of theiving children who take advantage of tourists in Rawl'Kha.

Antiquity

No, don't add them

seanvwolf wrote: »

There's a difference between using the death of children as story device versus a choice the audience gets to make.

As a story device, the reader is given to witness some external conflict or internal character's seriousness and depravity, to escalate the situation and to elevate tension and emotional response. LotF (as sited earlier) had deaths to children, but they were not indiscriminate and was very limited (can only remember one death). The books I do remember that had depicted meaningless abuse to children were also, in my opinion, sick.

Allowing the option for players to destroy children ingame is less like the above example and more like an example of "Choose-your-own Adventure" where every choice possibility revolves around the indiscriminate death of a child. Any reasonable person who ever saw anyone with such a book, no matter how old they were and how fantastic it would seem, would automatically think that the person was a depraved whackjob. And rightfully so.

What I'm trying to say here - or ask rather - is who exactly gave you (You as in all of you against this) a license to decide where the line between perfectly sane and lunatic is drawn?

Yes the death in LotF is a plot device. A plot device chosen by the author. You have a problem with RPers choosing the same plot device as as the author did. What makes the author's plot device more valid than the RPers? The answer is your opinion. Which you can keep to yourself, thank you, I have my own. If the game forced you to harm a child in a quest, I would agree with you 100%. I would make angry posts and possibly cancel my sub. But if it's optional, your hand is forced to do nothing contrary to your position and therefore its a non-issue.

This coming from a mother of a10 year old. I assure you that popping caps in the brats that stole from me in Fallout 2 in no way has affected my ability to stay up until 11pm working on a diorama for fourth grade science, or cook nutritious meals, or explain why you shouldn't hit little Timmy because he stole your girlfriend.

For those who can separate pretend from real, its a non-issue. Those who can't are just as likely to commit a real world murder after reading LotF as after killing a cultist in ESO.

dragonsquarterb16_ESO

Yes, add them

People who equate violence in real life with violence in a videogame.... should probably not be playing videogames.

seanvwolf

No, don't add them

seanvwolf wrote: »

... would automatically think that the person was a depraved whackjob. And rightfully so.

As in the right in thinking that the person was depraved and mentally unstable in not simply tolerating, but advocating, for acts of wonton violence against children for the sole purpose of "giving them the option".

We could all go to work in our birthday suits. It doesn't mean we should. And public opinion does matter and play a role in our personal development.

Antiquity wrote: »

What I'm trying to say here - or ask rather - is who exactly gave you (You as in all of you against this) a license to decide where the line between perfectly sane and lunatic is drawn?

The question at the heart is "Do certain interactive medias, which place the user/viewer in a role where violence is not just available but rewarded or unpunished in meaningful ways, do they desensitize the agent to other similar activities outside the given simulation?"

The answer, though honestly based on limited numbers of studies, is "yes". Even though it doesn't directly translate to violence in the real world in a quantifiable sense, studies have shown that agents exposed to simulated (violent or otherwise) activities with certain parameters will produce less sensitive experiences in other related activities, simulated or not. This is why someone who has never walked into the Louvre before will be much more impressed than another person who has taken a virtual tour of the museum online beforehand.

We read books, hear music, play games and watch movies because we want to get immersed. We desire to blur the lines of reality and fantasy, if for just a moment. I don't want to invite those types of sensory experiences to people who may not realize that they are, even if they don't know it, conditioning and desensitizing themselves towards the idea that violence toward children, virtual or not, is simply a fact of life. It might be, but we should strive to reduce it as much as possible wherever we can.

I'm not saying I'm averse to violence in video games. That is a staple sometime necessity to conduct civil matters in the real world. ESO is about a war between nations... As a central theme, it is acceptable to kill adults. We believe that adults have the ability to defend themselves and speak out, even though this isn't always don. But we do assume that children are the most vulnerable of our societies and as such, require the most protection. Indiscriminately killing children isn't a necessity to conduct civil matters, so i'd rather not desensitize people to that situation, thank you very much.

Gidorick

Yes, add them

eh... books are different from games...saying the two should have similar themes or mechanics is like saying that watching "Dancing With the Stars" should involve the same experiences as playing DDR. Apples and orangutans.

I actually wouldn't have an issue where you are given the choice in ESO to kill a kid or to not kill a kid as a plot device in a quest, but that's really not were talking about here. What we're talking about is the ability to openly slaughter neighborhood children.

That's what shouldn't be allowed.

seanvwolf

No, don't add them

Also remember that the TES series has not had children in during gameplay with exception to the recent additions to the series, Skyrim and Hearthfire addon. And even then, the entire nation of Skyrim only had a total of 49(?) children in a game with five times that number that are (at some point during gameplay) flagged essential and are unkillable. Limitless amounts of named and generic NPC's to kill. Children are not a standard of TES, anyhow. Much less killable children.

BBSooner

Antiquity wrote: »

show previous quotes

seanvwolf wrote: »

There's a difference between using the death of children as story device versus a choice the audience gets to make.

As a story device, the reader is given to witness some external conflict or internal character's seriousness and depravity, to escalate the situation and to elevate tension and emotional response. LotF (as sited earlier) had deaths to children, but they were not indiscriminate and was very limited (can only remember one death). The books I do remember that had depicted meaningless abuse to children were also, in my opinion, sick.

Allowing the option for players to destroy children ingame is less like the above example and more like an example of "Choose-your-own Adventure" where every choice possibility revolves around the indiscriminate death of a child. Any reasonable person who ever saw anyone with such a book, no matter how old they were and how fantastic it would seem, would automatically think that the person was a depraved whackjob. And rightfully so.

What I'm trying to say here - or ask rather - is who exactly gave you (You as in all of you against this) a license to decide where the line between perfectly sane and lunatic is drawn?

Yes the death in LotF is a plot device. A plot device chosen by the author. You have a problem with RPers choosing the same plot device as as the author did. What makes the author's plot device more valid than the RPers? The answer is your opinion. Which you can keep to yourself, thank you, I have my own. If the game forced you to harm a child in a quest, I would agree with you 100%. I would make angry posts and possibly cancel my sub. But if it's optional, your hand is forced to do nothing contrary to your position and therefore its a non-issue.

This coming from a mother of a10 year old. I assure you that popping caps in the brats that stole from me in Fallout 2 in no way has affected my ability to stay up until 11pm working on a diorama for fourth grade science, or cook nutritious meals, or explain why you shouldn't hit little Timmy because he stole your girlfriend.

For those who can separate pretend from real, its a non-issue. Those who can't are just as likely to commit a real world murder after reading LotF as after killing a cultist in ESO.

Heinous acts are left out of sandbox features because of the distasteful nature they provide. As such, we won't see *** or other forms of sexual abuse that players can inflict indiscriminately on NPCs, we won't see hate groups or torture that players can inflict indiscriminately on NPCs, and we likely won't see child murder (or infanticide for that matter) for the exact same reasons.

The validity or purpose of the act is null when the act can be performed in the absence of purpose, especially in what is supposed to be a broad appeal avenue of entertainment. So no, an RPers reasons for killing random kid #113 are not valid.

ShadowHvo

Yes, add them

I personally vote for yes, as it makes the world more realistic, I too vote on them being killable, as if they were not, there would be no way of getting rid of them in case they annoy the hell out of you.

No, I'm a perfectly fine person irl, and I despise all forms of violence and criminality in real life. But there is a huge difference between video game violence against non-playable-character and violence against another fellow being in real life. I myself, as many others can see the difference between the two.

If you're okay with playing in a world where everything from murder, thievery and "Defilement" does occour, but somehow can't live with yourself if you see a NPC child getting slapped across the face by another player, then you should probably choose another game to play, as Tamriel is a sick, twisted and horrible world when you dig deep enough.

seanvwolf

No, don't add them

ShadowHvo wrote: »

... Tamriel is a sick, twisted and horrible world when you dig deep enough.

Total number of children in Tamriel ever seen in the history of TES, 49.
Number of killable children in Tamriel, 0.
Really sick and horrible. Children can't seem to die until they are old enough. So twisted.

Antiquity

No, don't add them

seanvwolf wrote: »

The answer, though honestly based on limited numbers of studies, is "yes". Even though it doesn't directly translate to violence in the real world in a quantifiable sense, studies have shown that agents exposed to simulated (violent or otherwise) activities with certain parameters will produce less sensitive experiences in other related activities, simulated or not. This is why someone who has never walked into the Louvre before will be much more impressed than another person who has taken a virtual tour of the museum online beforehand.

We read books, hear music, play games and watch movies because we want to get immersed. We desire to blur the lines of reality and fantasy, if for just a moment. I don't want to invite those types of sensory experiences to people who may not realize that they are, even if they don't know it, conditioning and desensitizing themselves towards the idea that violence toward children, virtual or not, is simply a fact of life. It might be, but we should strive to reduce it as much as possible wherever we can.

I'm not saying I'm averse to violence in video games. That is a staple sometime necessity to conduct civil matters in the real world. ESO is about a war between nations... As a central theme, it is acceptable to kill adults. We believe that adults have the ability to defend themselves and speak out, even though this isn't always don. But we do assume that children are the most vulnerable of our societies and as such, require the most protection. Indiscriminately killing children isn't a necessity to conduct civil matters, so i'd rather not desensitize people to that situation, thank you very much.

Studies:
Violent Video Games and Real-World Violence: Rhetoric Versus Data conducted by researchers at Villanova University and Rutgers University, published in the Psychology of Popular Media Culture
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/violent-video-games-dont-lead-to-increases-in-viol/1100-6422421/

Here's a long term one from Stetson, published in the Journal of Communication.
http://www.sciencealert.com/definitive-study-finds-zero-link-found-between-video-game-and-youth-violence

I could go on, but I'd like to point out it's the *most recent* studies that by a majority point to there being no link between media violence/desensitization and real world crime/murder. Yes, limited older studies to point to desensitization happening due to media stimulation. These studies were mostly from the 90s, and done in a limited lab setting. But new, longer-term studies show that it's not the case. Kind of like when scientists find new evidence and change their viewpoint, and the history books, to line up with what we now know better about.

And even if you were right, how would you explain the steadily falling rate of crime in the U.S. with the increased allowance of graphic situations on T.V. and in music and games?

BBSooner wrote: »

Heinous acts are left out of sandbox features because of the distasteful nature they provide. As such, we won't see *** or other forms of sexual abuse that players can inflict indiscriminately on NPCs, we won't see hate groups or torture that players can inflict indiscriminately on NPCs, and we likely won't see child murder (or infanticide for that matter) for the exact same reasons.

The validity or purpose of the act is null when the act can be performed in the absence of purpose, especially in what is supposed to be a broad appeal avenue of entertainment. So no, an RPers reasons for killing random kid #113 are not valid.

Heinous acts? Like quest options based on blatant racism? Helping out a band of assassins? Leaving someone who has been poisoned to die? Leaving someone to be tortured eternally? Which are all already in the game.

Moral issues are subjective as long as no one is actively physically or emotionally harmed. You certainly aren't being harmed physically by a video game, and if you're being harmed emotionally because of someone else's actions that you'll never see in a video game (as npc death would certainly be clientside, not serverside) you might need to put the controller down.

Either way, I think I'll have to agree to disagree with both of you, as I've nothing further to add to the debate after this that I can foresee. It's been a pleasure, and gave me something to toss around in my mind for a while.

ShadowHvo

Yes, add them

seanvwolf wrote: »

show previous quotes

ShadowHvo wrote: »

... Tamriel is a sick, twisted and horrible world when you dig deep enough.

Total number of children in Tamriel ever seen in the history of TES, 49.
Number of killable children in Tamriel, 0.
Really sick and horrible. Children can't seem to die until they are old enough. So twisted.

We have gods dedicated to murder, cannibalism and defilement, slavery too. Several races partake widely in the different elements as well. If you ask me, it is absolutely hypocritical to be completely fine with slavery, defilement and murder of all sorts, but will go beserk if they see a child getting slapped across the face in a video game.

Whenever you like it or not, Tamriel is a twisted place. We have many hidden references to disgusting elements here in life which hopefully all in this forum find to be a disgrace in real life. BUT we're playing a fantasy epic, and can therefore explore said disgusting elements IF we wish to. It is not forced upon us, yet it is a choice the player has.

I have no doubt in that Bethesda made children unkillable because the media would attack them with all their got. After all, video games are our modern time scapegoat.

IF I do remember entirely correctly, they actually had a "Child killer perk" in fallout at one point, but it didn't make it past the development process for reasons we may never know, but my bets are still because the media would go beserk over it.

Do you dislike that horrible person who just killed a NPC child in a video game? Good for you! Smack on that Enforcer tabard and slaughter his arse! AN EYE FOR AN EYE!

tspecherb14_ESO

Yes, add them

Add them, make them unkillable (if it gets them in for immersion's sake, does not matter to me either way).

Chufu

Yes, add them

I would like to see children in the whole world of Tamriel. In my opinion it's not normal, to see only adults.

A world with children brings more life and makes more sense.

Psychobunni

No, don't add them

I would love to see unkillable children added to the game, however assuming they did that....

1. If all races weren't added, there would always be a post or plural for all races
2. There would always be a "let me kill children" post or plural
3. There would always be a "let me play a child as my character so I can role play parent/child families" post or plural

At what point would they make everyone happy? What kind of negativity would a major game with random killing of children bring? Legal worries for them if a hardcore ESO player just so happens to go on a real rampage? (not saying it would happen but a responsible company weighs the legal cost)

The world has pervs people...what doors would be opened by letting people play as children? (its not saying it would definitely happen, I'm saying its a legal angle they would have to look at)

The only logical answer is to never add them to the game at all and never even deal with any of it.

Lovelyn

Yes, add them

My kids were killed by a dragon in Skyrim... You could make them killable, or not. RPers will do what they want whether the medium is there or imaginary.

Darkonflare15

No, don't add them

Chufu wrote: »

I would like to see children in the whole world of Tamriel. In my opinion it's not normal, to see only adults.

A world with children brings more life and makes more sense.

Yeah but in most elder scrolls games their was no children except for Skyrim and even then it was still not normal because there was not one Elf, Orc, Khajiit, or Argoninan child. All the children were human except it was difficult to tell the difference between Imperial, Breton, and Nord children. They all look similar even though I think there should of be size differences and the Redguard children were just a little shade darker but still look like the other children.

Then if you have to account every race's children. So there should be a lots of Orc children running around to account all of those chieftains and their wives having children.
Also that one female Orc chieftan probably need another child,since her son died, even though I killed her. Then you have to account that most elves live for a long time and their children are mostly old except newly born. Also the difference variations of Khajiit follow by Argonian hatch lings, which would just be confusing. Then you have to have mix children like how the gray prince was in Oblivion. He was Half-orc and Half Vampiric nord and he looked like it.

There is plenty of mix relationships in ESO. So they may have to finally state info on if some of those couples can procreate. That is going to open up a can of worms. Then we have to have adoption agency for any couples who cannot have children because of birthing problems because drinking all those health potions cannot be healthy. Then we have plenty of same sex marriages who may want children too. Then players want to adopt children too. So they can roleplay. That is going to be a lot of stuff to add to make the world of Tamriel be normal. I find it unlikely that they would do this but I can just see the Expansion pack. Elder Scrolls Online - Rise of the Baby Boomers.
I can see both high end PvE and PvP riot about no new content for them.

Wolfsspinne

No, don't add them

I don't think so.
With that many kids on the internet, spamming chats and forums...

Messy1

Yes, add them

Elyna wrote: »

If they do add them. Dont make them be annoying little brats.

Or they could make them annoying little brats . . .

Wolfsspinne

No, don't add them

Messy1 wrote: »

show previous quotes

Elyna wrote: »

If they do add them. Dont make them be annoying little brats.

Or they could make them annoying little brats . . .

In which case they should be killable, and lootable with their own collectibles.

Gidorick

Yes, add them

Psychobunni wrote: »

I would love to see unkillable children added to the game, however assuming they did that....

1. If all races weren't added, there would always be a post or plural for all races
2. There would always be a "let me kill children" post or plural
3. There would always be a "let me play a child as my character so I can role play parent/child families" post or plural

I hadn't considered this. That would be terribly annoying... do other MMOs that have children have these posts and issues?

Psychobunni

No, don't add them

Gidorick wrote: »

I hadn't considered this. That would be terribly annoying... do other MMOs that have children have these posts and issues?

None that I've played actually had children. RP Hobbits only count in the mind of the RPer lol. There is already posts asking for different children types within this thread. Skyrim and Fallout used the same model over and over, but it wouldn't fit elven, argonian etc...they couldn't just "shrink" adults, it would still be an adult body, modifications would have to be made. So there would be quite a bit of customization involved creating children (people asking for mixed race too)

I was merely pointing out that some would never be happy and asking for more no matter what was done. Whether or not to develop an idea, ZOS has to also consider how far that idea may reach or how far people may ask for it to be reached.

Zershar_Vemod

Yes, add them

Sad to see so many delusional people with the inability to separate reality from fantasy.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Inappropriate Content and Language.

I guess a lot of people also forgot this is an M rated game and that children die every single day. A fantasy realm (Elder Scrolls) which contains magic, lizard / cat people, elves, dragons, hordes of undead, etc. should never be taken seriously...

I bet a lot of the loons here think that video games cause violent behavior too, but ignore that bad parenting and actual mental illnesses are the real issues people should be focusing on.

I could honestly care less if we have legions of immortal children in this game. The only reason Skyrim didn't release killable children was because of backlash from idiots who thought video games were real apparently; I mean, there is still full voiced dialog in Skyrim for the deaths of children in it.

I wonder how many millions of npcs we've all killed since launch...I don't see people complaining about that, or why isn't this game getting heavy protest for killing animals?

Too many children playing an M rated game it seems...remember everyone, we are talking about PIXELS.