Your thoughts on the invincible children

[Flamingtaco]

What are your feelings on this issue?

I for one dislike the idea of having invulnerable NPCs, period. Especially when the reasons for this are of purely political nature since Bethesda doesn’t seem to have the balls to deal with the possible controversy that could arise from this. The rating wouldn’t be a problem since it already is at “Mature”. I am pretty disappointed about this decision. Hopefully the Radiant Story will respond to children’s deaths if it is modded in so that we have at least this way a possibility to correct this bad design choice.

I mean, come on, Bethesda, what the heck? So if a dragon burns a village to cinders a bunch snotty brats will stand unharmed amidst the ashes afterwards? How stupid is that? It totally ruined the immersion of the respective part in “Fallout”.

I dont think any dragons burn down villages. If they do, then its scripted and they dont destroy the whole thing. If Bethesda allowed you to kill children then skyrim would be banned like everywhere. If its that big a deal to you, im sure someone will make a mod.

 

[Demut]

I don’t understand what basis you people have for claiming that mortal children would get Skyrim banned. Look at games which do have them. Have they been “banned like everywhere”? No.
While I see why they wouldn’t implement this for other financial reasons (i.e. less customers who have children of their own might buy the game) but these worries about censorship seem arbitrary.

If you kill a child a guard will immediatly spawn behind you and initiate a conversation, however what he says is different from the normal arrest conversation. "It's all over child killer! You will pay for this horrific crime with your life." You will not be given a chance to pay a fine or resist arrest. Instead a message will appear on the screen that says "You have been sentenced to death for murdering a child." the screen goes black and you are then sent back to your last save point, the same as if you had died.

Isn’t this kind of an overkill though? Do you think that a society in which murdering someone in the broad daylight is okay as long as you have enough money would really be that much more upset about the murder of a child? I highly doubt that.

 

[KayO199X]

Isn’t this kind of an overkill though? Do you think that a society in which murdering someone in the broad daylight is okay as long as you have enough money would really be that much more upset about the murder of a child? I highly doubt that.

You just don't seen to get it Demut. Murdering a child is far more severe than murdering an adult, and for a number of reasons.

1. Because children are so much smaller than adults, they are unable to properly defend themselves from an adult. Thouse harming a child is seen as unsportsmanlike.

2. Think of murdering someone as theft, because you are stealing the rest of a person's life away. When killing a child, this theft is more sever, because the child still has so much of their life left to live.

3. Children are innocent. There is no such thing as an evil child (and don't even think about mention Tom Riddle from Harry Potter). This is because children are like a blank slate. They are uncorrupted by the sins and vices of the world around them. That is why harming a child is considered far more evil than harming an adult.

I find it disterbing that you do not seem to understand this.

 

[ChicN Freak]

I believe that you should not be able to kill the children, nor any other npc besides a dragon. Say a dragon swoops overhead and burns a town to nothing, the children should not be saved. BUT, if you hit them with swords or whatever or bows you should be able to kncok them out

 

[ChicN Freak]

You just don't seen to get it Demut. Murdering a child is far more severe than murdering an adult, and for a number of reasons.

1. Because children are so much smaller than adults, they are unable to properly defend themselves from an adult. Thouse harming a child is seen as unsportsmanlike.

2. Think of murdering someone as theft, because you are stealing the rest of a person's life away. When killing a child, this theft is more sever, because the child still has so much of their life left to live.

3. Children are innocent. There is no such thing as an evil child (and don't even think about mention Tom Riddle from Harry Potter). This is because children are like a blank slate. They are uncorrupted by the sins and vices of the world around them. That is why harming a child is considered far more evil than harming an adult.

I find it disterbing that you do not seem to understand this.

You know what? I knew a kid, who was an asshole , that used to grab pins and whatnot and jab them right through the backs of grade 2 students. He also took pleasure in grabbing insects and pulling thier limbs of VERY slowly. If that is not evil, I don't know what is.

 

[KayO199X]

You know what? I knew a kid, who was an asshole , that used to grab pins and whatnot and jab them right through the backs of grade 2 students. He also took pleasure in grabbing insects and pulling thier limbs of VERY slowly. If that is not evil, I don't know what is.

That may seem crule, but this child is not evil. Lots of kids are crule to animals, and many more bully other kids. It's not because their evil, it's only because their making up for personal inadiquacies or simply because they are too young to know any better. Almost all kids who are bullies or crule to animals grow out of this when they get older.

 

[Skooma Virgin]

You just don't seen to get it Demut. Murdering a child is far more severe than murdering an adult, and for a number of reasons.

1. Because children are so much smaller than adults, they are unable to properly defend themselves from an adult. Thouse harming a child is seen as unsportsmanlike.

2. Think of murdering someone as theft, because you are stealing the rest of a person's life away. When killing a child, this theft is more sever, because the child still has so much of their life left to live.

3. Children are innocent. There is no such thing as an evil child (and don't even think about mention Tom Riddle from Harry Potter). This is because children are like a blank slate. They are uncorrupted by the sins and vices of the world around them. That is why harming a child is considered far more evil than harming an adult.

I find it disterbing that you do not seem to understand this.

Video game.

 

[3pic3raser]

Invincible children have been in RPG's and Bethesda games for as long as I can remember, it doesn't really bother me anymore.

 

[Deseoso]

I for one am glad of the invincible children in the game. Yes I understand the point raised by some people that it takes away from the realism of the game. My charachter has been in the world of Skyrim for about two months now and hasn't been to the toilet once. I'm not going to start complaining to Bethesda that my character is not able to take a dump.

And back to the subject of child killing, it has been used in the story. The werewolf storyline where a man is accused of tearing a little girl to pieces. As for whether they should be allowed to be killed by the player is another matter. I stand by my opinion that they shouldn't and here is why.

If it were possible, I have no doubt that the majority of gamers would not want to go around killing children. A very small minority of sick people would enjoy it. I personally have no problem whatsoever denying that small sick portion of society their bizarre desire to murder children, virtual or otherwise.

Finally let me point out, I only know that children in the game are invulnerable from this thread. I have never tried to kill one in game. To the original poster of this thread, can you say the same?

And credit Bethesda with some game creating ability. At the start of the game Helgen was burned to the ground. There was a kid in Helgen, I remember that he was watching the prisoner carts when they pulled through town. Bethesda just left him out of the scene of the burning, leaving the players imagination to fill in the rest of the story. His parents probably made him hide in the house during the house during the attack only to be burned with the house. Claiming that a dragon might burn a town to the ground leaving a bunch of immortal children walking around like some kind of glitch is just crazy. They have put way too much thought into the game for that to happen.

 

[hexperiment]

Like I pointed out earlier, some countries will straight out ban Skyrim if it had child killing. I doubt Bethesda would want to deny a lot of people of Skyrim just to satiate small minority that wants it for 'realism' and 'freedom' excuses. Oh believe me, I do believe there should be realism and freedom in Skyrim but a pointless and small feature like 'YOU CAN KILL KIDS NOW!' won't do much in Skyrim. No one here wants to kill children anyway... Right? And if the censored version comes out in those countries, they might as well remove gore on the way. It's just not worth it. I'm surprised this is still a huge debate.

If you just don't like the idea of immortal children, I understand. But if you're not going to kill them anyway, then why argue FOR child-killing? Why are you asking to remove a censorship when you're not going to see it or do it in the first place? Is it because an accidental glimpse of unharmed children will destroy your immersion? That's the only (sane) reason I can think of. Really, if that's the only decent reason then it's not good enough to justify why you are purposefully or inadvertently supporting sick people who enjoy murdering defenseless children. And no, don't say child killing is same as adult killing. It's not. Child killing is worse than adult killing. You can call it double standard all you want but that's what moral societies agree with.

 

[ChicN Freak]

That may seem crule, but this child is not evil. Lots of kids are crule to animals, and many more bully other kids. It's not because their evil, it's only because their making up for personal inadiquacies or simply because they are too young to know any better. Almost all kids who are bullies or crule to animals grow out of this when they get older.

-_- Trust me. If you knew this... abomination, you would think differently.

 

[BlackRat]

First a bit of background.

I'm 39 years old.
My first video game system was "pong".
I have owned and played every generation of console out there, if you name the system, I have owned it. From the Atari 2600 through the TG-16, the 3DO, 360 and everything in between. Th video game industry and I have grown up together. When I was a kid... gaming was kidstuff. The industry has grown with us...

I have a large amount of expendable income, and trust me when I say... I AM the target market for gaming companies.

I only have one question about the "kid killing" option.

What would it add to the game, exactly? There are no quests involving child assassination or beatings (thankfully) so any "choice" to do so is strictly a "cuz I can" decision. It's pointless, in poor taste, and I question the mental stability of any individual who says "this would be sooo much cooler if I could murder that kid running around the village".

I would pose this question;

How old are those of you who think the option should be included?
How many are parents, or have very young siblings?
How would it improve the gameplay and experience you have?

Children are society's most vulnerable people, the above "example" notwithstanding. A game featuring a deliberate "choice to harm them would be abhorrent and unnecessary.I have played hundreds of role-playing games... and not once did I ever say "this game would be better if I had the option to attack children".

Bethesda has made the right choice, and I am glad they stick to it.

 

[Kai]

What kind of person would want to see children die? That just seems messed up, I am happy they dont die but I dont know that much about it because I am not someone that enjoys killing children. Even though its just a video game, its just a terrible way to entertain yourself.

Smart move Bethesda.

 

[Jack Baptie]

For me, its not the moral aspect, its for clarity.

Like, you have to kill someone, and a child sees you, they'll report you and there's nothing you can do about it. While if you COULD kill the child, there'd be no witnesses so there's no fine/worse!

 

[Divinity]

I don't like the idea of invulnerability for anything. Everything should be able to die. I mean I'm the main protagonist and I die! if these children are surviving plops let them go save the world from Alduin.

 

[Sebastián Piazza]

meh i read the first page of this thread and i got bored i don't really care if npc-children can be killed or not, they add almost nothing to the game and are a really little part of it.... the game is much bigger than just a bunch of npc-children, tough they being there, it adds a lot more of realism to the game.

 

[Migaluch]

It kinda makes sense to not allow kids to die, I mean it should be realistic, but allowing for it would be a big risk that Bethesda surely wouldn't want to take. If I was a developer, I would probably put in child invincibility just to avoid potential probelms. Mods can take it away anyways, right?

Not being able to kill kids makes the game less, realistic, but its really not a big deal.

 

[Belial666]

Isn't there a console command to make an immortal NPC into a mortal?

 

[hoopera]

It's either all ok, or none of it is.

 

[Kerzechtus]

You know how many times I wanted to murder the battle born child, b/c he snitched on me when I was stealing some silver ingots to max my smithing. I sat there, drilling him in the face and was like ... WOWWWW