Support NeoGAF

[IHaveCandy]

The MGS5 trailer made me think of this. Usually games will make children invincible just so that the player won't kill them, no matter how silly it looks. If a child dies in a game, it is usually tied to the story deeply and is meant to be a very impactful moment. I can't think of any games that treat children dying as cheaply as adults.

In the MGS5 trailer, you see a child being gutted open for his own good and being choked out, as well as what looks like to be a part of Les Enfants Terribles. It looks like a big part of this story will be about the child soldier program mentioned in the MGS games. How would you feel for example if there was a mission in MGS5 where the soldiers were children that could be killed? Perhaps Snake obviously does not want to kill the children, but it is a possibility for him to do if necessary. Do you think it is too taboo for video games?

 

[benny_a]

JASON!

 

[Volotaire]

Deus Ex 1

Honestly, I think so.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

Sure.

 

[supergiz]

Happens in movies. Why not in games?

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

The MGS5 trailer made me think of this. Usually games will make children invincible just so that the player won't kill them, no matter how silly it looks. If a child dies in a game, it is usually tied to the story deeply and is meant to be a very impactful moment. I can't think of any games that treat children dying as cheaply as adults.

In the MGS5 trailer, you see a child being gutted open for his own good and being choked out, as well as what looks like to be a part of Les Enfants Terribles. It looks like a big part of this story will be about the child soldier program mentioned in the MGS games. How would you feel for example if there was a mission in MGS5 where the soldiers were children that could be killed? Perhaps Snake obviously does not want to kill the children, but it is a possibility for him to do if necessary. Do you think it is too taboo for video games?

Because that is how it should be (at least in the videogame mainstream). Being less than that is tasteless.

 

[IHaveCandy]

JASON!

See, that's an example of how most video games handle a child dying. It's a part of the story and it's supposed to be more profound because it's a child.

 

[goldenpp72]

Yeah, I won't say I actively hope it happens, but I also won't care if it does happen. The way people put childrens lives as 100x more important than that of someone who is 18 and older is stupid anyways.

 

[LordJim]

Sure, why not.
There will be interesting and horrid ways to do it, like virtually everything else

 

[joezombie]

It's fine in non-cinematic or story-centric games. It's just a different model getting ragdolled

 

[ElectricKaibutsu]

As long as it's done in a way that says "this is bad". I wouldn't want kids in GTA for instance.

 

[IHaveCandy]

Because that is how it should be (at least in the videogame mainstream). Being less than that is tasteless.

Why not make it so the children in Skyrim can be killed, but if you kill them you have an extreme bounty on your head that doesn't really ever go away? I don't think it should be treated as tasteless while killing adults is not.

 

[Awntawn]

depends on the context

are they crying in the movie theater or something?

Spoiler

joking btw hope it's not bannable or something

 

[viewtiful_dru]

Yeah, I won't say I actively hope it happens, but I also won't care if it does happen. The way people put childrens lives as 100x more important than that of someone who is 18 and older is stupid anyways.

uh... there's the whole concept of a person that hasn't lived long enough to see things in the world and need to be given the potential to do so by living

 

[Emitan]

 

[Hattori]

if it's appropriate and central to the plot, then I don't see why not

 

[benny_a]

See, that's an example of how most video games handle a child dying. It's a part of the story and it's supposed to be more profound because it's a child.

I think everything should be able to die. Children, women, dogs, flowers.

It's just easy for me to say as I'm not making games targeted at audiences that live in countries where everyone is just waiting to demonize video games.

 

[Orpheus Telos]

Definitely. It's really silly in games like Fallout and Skyrim when I can slaughter entire towns but the kids can't be touched. Talk about immersion breaking.

 

[Mauricio_Magus]

Yes, death is a reality that can happen to anyone and censoring it because "THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN" is silly.

 

[krypt0nian]

I don't see why virtual children would be different from virtual adults.

 

[Skelter]

Fallout 1 and 2 don't discriminate.

 

[IHaveCandy]

uh... there's the whole concept of a person that hasn't lived long enough to see things in the world and need to be given the potential to do so by living

I think he was more hitting the point about the specific age being arbitrary.

 

[the_batman]

sure, if it's related to the story, why not. kids are dying everyday in real life over stupider stuff.

 

[Marjar]

Eh I don't think it's a necessity, but if you want a game to be more immersive it's not a bad idea.

Invincible children in Fallout for example is a bit silly.

 

[Bluekaveli]

Yep, I've been wanting this in GTA forever.

 

[shinobi602]

Sure, it's just a game.

 

[FStop7]

Shooting that snotty kid with the rocket launcher in Deus Ex was gratifying and funny but probably not something every game should do.

 

[Eusis]

As the story demands: yes, I don't see why they should specifically be walled off, at least not so the likes of rating boards get in the way with de facto bans.

For player control: I lean towards it, but unlike the former I can easily see why they'd be hesitant and can't blame them.

 

[MochaBearX]

Yes, if its not mndless.

 

[Nothing1016]

Anything that is considered a leaving creature should be able to die in a game.

 

[Riposte]

One of the reasons Deus Ex is one of the best games of all time.

 

[PAULINK]

This made me laugh like crazy, god I'm going to hell.

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

Why not make it so the children in Skyrim can be killed, but if you kill them you have an extreme bounty on your head that doesn't really ever go away?

That could be pretty intersting if managed right.

I don't think it should be treated as tasteless while killing adults is not.

Eh... that is a pretty different topic. Dunno if you want to have it.

 

[Kai Dracon]

Children being treated as sacred is reflection of just about every culture on Earth. Children are (generally) considered off-limits for the depravity and excesses of the adult world. Because they are still innocents and mostly at the mercy of all-powerful adults.

Perhaps the question shouldn't be "should children be allowed to die in video games". Rather "if killing children becomes common in video games, what will be the effects on the medium?"

Because no matter how much gamers may try to shrug off digital death, the taboos against exploiting children are extremely powerful in society. For example, if games began to use children as cannon fodder or targets of apathetic player killing sprees, I think there would be some rather negative effects.

 

[kick51]

In the Citizen Kane of Gaming, no children will be spared and it will be dark, mature.

 

[Darkmakaimura]

In JRPGs, children die all the time.

 

[jediyoshi]

See, that's an example of how most video games handle a child dying. It's a part of the story and it's supposed to be more profound because it's a child.

What are these games?

Either way, it's a reference to the funky voice acting and being able to abuse the call out mechanic, not any actual narrative scene.

 

[OfWhiteSkinOnRedLeather]

Definitely. It's really silly in games like Fallout and Skyrim when I can slaughter entire towns but the kids can't be touched. Talk about immersion breaking.

Eh I don't think it's a necessity, but if you want a game to be more immersive it's not a bad idea.

Invincible children in Fallout for example is a bit silly.

Fallout 3. In Fallout 1 and 2 children are not invincible.

 

[Foaloal]

I don't really think it matters if the virtual person you're virtually murdering is a child or an adult. I mean, ending somebody's life is terrible, it doesn't really matter to me if they're a child or an adult because they're still essentially defenseless against the player character.

It seems weird to me to draw the line at "it's ok to virtually murder people, provided they are depicted as over 18 years of age". I mean is killing a 17 year old character worse than killing an 18 year old? Is there really any difference?

That said, most companies wouldn't consider allowing virtual children to be killed, just because of the media coverage they will get. At the same time though it would be a lot of free media exposure, and some would say any fame is good fame.

I know it's been in older games, but I'm not sure if the political climate will ever be such that it will show up again. I mean, I definitely don't want legislators saying "look at this game, you can kill children! video games are evil! Let's ban the sales of them!"

 

[VillageBC]

Yeah, I won't say I actively hope it happens, but I also won't care if it does happen. The way people put childrens lives as 100x more important than that of someone who is 18 and older is stupid anyways.

Because by 18 you can general determine the person is useless to society and no great loss. The child still has a shot at being the next Einstein or Mozart.

 

[goldenpp72]

uh... there's the whole concept of a person that hasn't lived long enough to see things in the world and need to be given the potential to do so by living

One could in turn argue that a person who hasn't seen anything has less to lose in the event of dying, and thus less tragic. My main point was that a kid that is 12 being killed vs one that is 18 is a stupid thing to debate, both lives have comparable value in my eyes, but the detachment people have when it comes to killing a young adult shouldn't be acceptable if the same doesn't apply to killing a child. I know if I blew an innocent persons head off in real life it would definitely screw with me emotionally, child or 20 year old.

I don't feel bad when I kill characters in GTA because well, they are not only fake, but make no attempt at coming off as real people, they are just annoying obstacles in the way of my vehicle, so why should a shorter 'younger' model really matter? Will people break down in tears after running over little Timmy vs the 30 people they just blew up on a bus?

 

[sleepykyo]

Yes. Generally any subject should be possible, regardless of whether I would like the subject.

 

[Wyndstryker]

JASON!

SHAAUUUNN!!

 

[Crash Station]

Of course. Whether it's tasteless or not doesn't matter. There's plenty of tasteless death among everything else in all mediums. Kids shouldn't be different. It's fiction.

 

[Rickenslacker]

If you're going to include children, and you're going to allow those player verbs, then yes. Inexplicably invulnerable children are dumb as hell, if this universe somehow gates one off from death until adulthood then they can go off to save the world.

 

[Orpheus Telos]

Fallout 3. In Fallout 1 and 2 children are not invincible.

I know. I figured it would be obvious which Fallout's I was talking about.

 

[SatoAilDarko]

Yes they should but the player should never be able to kill them in game. You shouldn't be able to randomly kill child NPC's or have to kill one as an objective for example.

 

[Kyzon]

Invincible kids usually kill immersion for me. Either make them behave (when attacked) like everyone else, or leave them out completely.


Scenario time!

So I'm playing Fallout: New Vegas, and I just get a shiny new toy gun, but wait! It's not a toy gun! It's a painter for an orbital strike cannon. I see a few kids precariously playing tag in the wasteland (I stole this toy from them the other day), I point in their direction and apply pressure to the trigger. The air heats up, and I see ions starting to float. The kids are still frolicking as if nothing could ever go wrong. Further back I see my companion running. She's (He's?) a mutant and late to the party as usual. I open my mouth to warn shim, but it's too late. The beam from the heavens comes crashing down, destroying everything in front of me. My mutant friend's arm caresses my cheek as it flies by... Moments later the dust clears and the kids tell me I'm being mean......... Clearly oblivious to the destruction that I wrought just moments earlier.

/scenario


Sigh

 

[Branduil]

Who doesn't want to murder some fictional children?

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

I don't really think it matters if the virtual person you're virtually murdering is a child or an adult. I mean, ending somebody's life is terrible, it doesn't really matter to me if they're a child or an adult because they're still essentially defenseless against the player character.

It seems weird to me to draw the line at "it's ok to virtually murder people, provided they are depicted as over 18 years of age". I mean is killing a 17 year old character worse than killing an 18 year old? Is there really any difference?

That said, most companies wouldn't consider allowing virtual children to be killed, just because of the media coverage they will get. At the same time though it would be a lot of free media exposure, and some would say any fame is good fame.

I know it's been in older games and eventually, but I'm not sure if the political climate will ever be such that it will show up again. I mean, I definitely don't want legislators saying "look at this game, you can kill children! video games are evil! Let's ban the sales of them!"

One could in turn argue that a person who hasn't seen anything has less to lose in the event of dying, and thus less tragic. My main point was that a kid that is 12 being killed vs one that is 18 is a stupid thing to debate, both lives have comparable value in my eyes, but the detachment people have when it comes to killing a young adult shouldn't be acceptable if the same doesn't apply to killing a child. I know if I blew an innocent persons head off in real life it would definitely screw with me emotionally, child or 20 year old.

I don't feel bad when I kill characters in GTA because well, they are not only fake, but make no attempt at coming off as real people, they are just annoying obstacles in the way of my vehicle, so why should a shorter 'younger' model really matter? Will people break down in tears after running over little Timmy vs the 30 people they just blew up on a bus?

Ugh...

Of course. Whether it's tasteless or not doesn't matter. There's plenty of tasteless death among everything else in all mediums. Kids shouldn't be different. It's fiction.

I agree to a extent. Is fiction after all. But I still prefer that is used in a intelligent manner than just for the sake of it.