Sims type games have always had that kind of appeal to be able to go full sociopath in a harmless way. Drowning Sims in pools is a classic of gaming. The devs can do what they want with their game, but (unless this was something they had to do for publishing reasons) it strikes me as strange that they apologized for players being able to hit kids with cars in game, or abusing interactions to kidnap NPCs.
A) the game’s rating would skyrocket as it’d almost universally get upgraded to an AO rating or equivalent (not sure if that’s actually something they care about though)
B) while not technically illegal afaik, there are a number of countries that would almost certainly ban the game if it showed children being killed. My understanding is that’s why child deaths occasionally show up in movies and TV, but tend to be avoided like the plague in video games.
I understanding removing the ability for publishing reasons. It is the apparently mandatory apology which I find a bit humorous and pointless. “We’re sorry because of unforeseen player actions which were obviously not an intended part of design.”
Perhaps I’m just so deadened to the hollow “We will do better.” apologies belted out by companies and public personalities, where the apology reads the same regardless of the amount of actual fault.
Because to the black and white people out there it’s bad that a child can come to any amount of harm no matter how fictional those children may be. It’s a similar trend to the old anti-game movement because these people believe the sort of person who picks up a digital AK47 and clip dumps some NPCs is the sort of person who would do the same in real life and thus shouldn’t be able to in any capacity, as if removing an entirely fake playground stems true homicidal rage and definitely doesn’t point to failed parenting in teaching consequence or genuine mental illness.
Precisely. It’s easy to give oneself the moral high ground when the hill you choose to die on costs significantly less in time, effort and money. Helping real people is far too expensive but if you make yourself sound like a humanitarian by defending fictional people then that’s pretty cost-effective.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
deleted by creator
The indomitable human spirit
Sims type games have always had that kind of appeal to be able to go full sociopath in a harmless way. Drowning Sims in pools is a classic of gaming. The devs can do what they want with their game, but (unless this was something they had to do for publishing reasons) it strikes me as strange that they apologized for players being able to hit kids with cars in game, or abusing interactions to kidnap NPCs.
A) the game’s rating would skyrocket as it’d almost universally get upgraded to an AO rating or equivalent (not sure if that’s actually something they care about though)
B) while not technically illegal afaik, there are a number of countries that would almost certainly ban the game if it showed children being killed. My understanding is that’s why child deaths occasionally show up in movies and TV, but tend to be avoided like the plague in video games.
I understanding removing the ability for publishing reasons. It is the apparently mandatory apology which I find a bit humorous and pointless. “We’re sorry because of unforeseen player actions which were obviously not an intended part of design.”
Perhaps I’m just so deadened to the hollow “We will do better.” apologies belted out by companies and public personalities, where the apology reads the same regardless of the amount of actual fault.
This would make me want to do even more degenerate things in the game
Because to the black and white people out there it’s bad that a child can come to any amount of harm no matter how fictional those children may be. It’s a similar trend to the old anti-game movement because these people believe the sort of person who picks up a digital AK47 and clip dumps some NPCs is the sort of person who would do the same in real life and thus shouldn’t be able to in any capacity, as if removing an entirely fake playground stems true homicidal rage and definitely doesn’t point to failed parenting in teaching consequence or genuine mental illness.
These people also care more about what happens to fictional people than what happens to real people.
They want to restrict access to virtual guns, but actively fight any efforts to restrict access to real ones. It’s so dumb
Precisely. It’s easy to give oneself the moral high ground when the hill you choose to die on costs significantly less in time, effort and money. Helping real people is far too expensive but if you make yourself sound like a humanitarian by defending fictional people then that’s pretty cost-effective.
Okay but what about people of other races
Take your upvote and get out.
In-game, right? Right???
I saw Anakin killing younglings
And i did nothing, because I’m not a youngling.
How dare people play with their dolls in the way they enjoy!?
Why can’t they just let me abuse fake people in peace???
smh literally 1984