Should We Be Able To Kill Kids in Games?
by Keane Ng on November 1, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Call me sick, but in my time with Fable 2, I’ve tried to kill kids. Multiple times. You see, my character’s evil. He’d do that. He seduces men and women and takes them under the bridge and puts a flintlock rifle in their faces and pulls the trigger without remorse. He soaks up the upgrades to evil and corruption stats like they’re candy.
But kids, no matter what you do, seem to have an invisible forcefield around them. Just like GTA IV, just like in Fallout 3. Games that are about moral choices, that seem to say – we won’t go this far.
In the case of Fallout 3, lead designer Emil Pagliarulo had this to say on the topic:
We began to think, really what benefit would there be in killing the kids in the game? It just seems gratuitous, unnecessary and cruel.
Some people would say it is necessary, though.
Simon Parkin over at GameSetWatch specifically. For him, the moral depth of making the decision to kill or not kill a child is something from which games shouldn’t shy away or bar themselves from. In putting up a big “we’re not going there” sign, developers who would make a game that, on the one hand, lets you blow up an entire suburb (and probably kill some kids in the process) but doesn’t let you kill a child face to face, are failing the potential of their artistic medium:
In removing the opportunity to kill children in their anarchic game, Bethesda has admitted videogames’ ineffectiveness in providing meaningful disincentives and negative repercussions for in-game atrocities. That the team chose to carve the issue out of their game rather than attempt to engage it head on, speaks volumes.
I side with Parkin on this. Though I understand the pressure on Bethesda to avoid as much potential controversy with their game as possible, I do wish more games (like the first two Fallouts) would allow these kinds of moral choices – and if they do deliver them, to be mature, realistic and brave about it.
What do you guys think?
 |
|
|
- EA Brings Educational Games to DS
- Microsoft responds to Obama’s Xbox Comment
- ‘Brain Age’ Creator is Freaking Crazy
- Battlefield 1943 Coral Sea Map May Come Soon
- Bully Returns, So Does Controversy
- Videogames Don’t Kill People, Idiots Do: Why Games Are a Scapegoat
- Left 4 Dead Achievement Pokes Fun At Dead Rising
- Study: Gamers More Social Than Non-Gamers
8 Comments » |
on November 1, 2008 1:36 pm
Killing is killing. I don’t see why there is such a difference between killing a 17-year-old and an 18-year-old, and I get especially annoyed when there is an accident on the news and they say something like “23 people were killed, including women, children, and some elderly.” I don’t see why they get a special mention as if their lives are more valuable and it’s more tragic because it wasn’t all just adult men.
Anyhow, while it would be horrifically out of place in some contexts, I think Fallout is a perfect example of a context where it would fit. Everyone is trying so hard to survive, it wouldn’t be unbelievable that some 12-year-olds, without the proper development of logic, would be just as likely to kill for their own survival as anyone would, if not more so.
I think these “difficult moral choices” that a lot of games are all about these days are not presenting you with really tough ones like this. Could you look a child in the face and shoot him? Most people probably couldn’t. What if he was going to hurt your dog, or had a bomb that he was going to set off, maybe not even knowing the consequences. These are the types of scenarios that would really give people pause and think more about the weight and impact of their decisions — it would show that gaming can be a more powerful artistic experience than movies because YOU have to make that decision.
on November 1, 2008 4:33 pm
You absolutely should be able to kill kids in fable2/fallout3/etc. If it’s a game where you can choose to be evil and do evil things.. why not?
“But..but.. it’s immoral!”
Then don’t do it.
“That’s wrong!”
Great, don’t do it.
See a pattern? In a game that allows you to make choices you can simply choose not to do it. Which would actually make you a BETTER character because you aren’t killing children because you don’t want to, not because the game won’t let you.
on November 1, 2008 6:35 pm
It seems strange that you guys are promoting the ability to kill children as a good thing. Besides the obvious mental disorders you must have for WANTING this option and that you should seek help for (my charge is $10,000 per hour unless you go on my show and let me exploit you), I can’t help but agree with you.
on November 1, 2008 8:45 pm
We should be able to kill anything we want — as long as we don’t see any nipple.
on November 2, 2008 6:13 am
The only game I know where you can kill kids in a game is Drakengard. You also kill babies.
on November 2, 2008 11:12 am
I think game developers have a responsibility to society for what they produce, just like we have a responsibility to ourselves for what we allow ourselves to play.
i’ve heard “if you don’t like, don’t play it” on the internet a million times. but what we don’t think about is that Bethesda and Lionshead control what we like.
They could make a game that has us doing atrocious things like murdering kids that would could be really fun. or they could have included it in fallout or fable, but they didn’t and they shouldn’t because they have a responsibility to not bring us to that level.
it’s a moral responsibility we share with developer. A partnership that decides what our society plays. And i’m not willing to decide that our society is one that really digs games where you kill children.
and you know, if a games sole purpose is to bring you fun, you should ask yourself if you really want murdering kids and fun to be so closely linked in your mind. Even if it goes with the apocalyptic landscape or the evil devil horned character you created, do you really want to spend 40 hours linking those two concepts so closely?
on January 7, 2009 8:01 pm
Killing kids is fun, You can’t kill a screaming brat who ruins your dinner with hours of screaming so you go on your computer and murder them there. Its more healthy than really doing it, and I would if you ban kids being killed in games, That’s a promise!!
on July 28, 2009 12:18 pm
Jonathan Z, I disagree. why gripe about killing kids in games where its understood its only a game when we see kids get killed on tv and movies all the time. Wouldn't the producers and directors have the same responsibility you give to the game developers. More people see tv and movies than play games. If you feel strongly about it, go stop Hollywood from writing scenes where kids get killed. Apparently our society is one where we dig seeing kids get killed on screen. This whole it's not moral thing is BS to hide the truth that it's really all about money. There is a big double standard here. I will prove it. TV and movies get paid sponsors and cash from companies who want the story told. They get paid and box office will draw. Game developers must rely on each copy sold. Most of them won't take a chance on losing cash because some mothers group refuses to buy the game for their 16 year old kid and calls for a nation wide boycott. If game developers made money like the tv and movie people do we would see lots more kid killing in games.
Btw, here are a few games where you can kill kids. The Sims, Fable, The Incredible Hulk, Postal, Black & White. The Sims is the worst, you can lock a kid in a room and starve him. You can put him in a pool and remove the ladder and see him drown. you can put him in a kitchen with a lit stove and watch him play with it till he sets himself on fire and screams until he dies. The Sims is not known for being a violent game.. just gos to show what people have dreamed up.