At some point in future most likely yes - just like in case of The Witcher franchise.
Female V Figma from GoodSmile please
At some point in future most likely yes - just like in case of The Witcher franchise.
Okay, look. I have no issue if CDPR come out and are like, "hey, we don't like the idea of killing kids and it'd cause problems with certain countries, so we're not going to do it." It's just the myth that it's somehow prohibited by the ESRB that drives me a little batty. I searched through that hearing for "children," "kid," and "kill," and it all seems to be talking about cop-killing and the effects of that violence on real children. Nothing about child-killing itself popped up. The legislators don't even seem capable of entertaining the notion that games would be played by anyone other than children, so any potential moral questions in that vein appear to have been left completely unaddressed thanks to good old-fashioned myopia.
The ESRB has no "this game contains violence against minors" content descriptor. In fact, the only changes they saw in 2006 pertained to awareness and enforcement of their existing rules. I've never heard of them refusing classification for that reason (or any other), either. More, none of the games rated Adults Only feature child-killing in any capacity.
With all due respect, I can't believe that a hearing focused almost exclusively on cop-killing and generic violence resulted in a trendsetting shift in the enforcement of something that wasn't actually mentioned while simultaneously doing nothing to curtail or otherwise punish the actual games the Congresspeople were targeting.
This statement I can't abide. I challenge you to a duel.
CDPR have yet to get back to me about the use of spoons in Cyberpunk.
I didn't index the source, and could be mistaken, but I thought #3 was answered, you will often have the choice on how to resolve an issue and so avoid killing, but you won't be able to make it through the game without killing anyone.
Trying to find a source, but all I'm finding is the same sentiment on cyberware, so unless someone corroborates this take it with a grain of salt.
Thank you. I did try to see if anyone has already asked these but I did find anything with a solid answer. tho is suspect the answer to each of them is a no...
That could simply boil down to it always being incredibly rare. I mean, only a handful of games allowed this before 2006 despite how many were released. Few games include children, and fewer still allow attacking random people.Yet, you don't see any video games where you can kill children released in the United States after 2006. And that's the only change as far as content you see in video games.
Okay, but there's only one Shatner, so one of us is going to be at a serious disadvantage.Fine. Ham-to-ham combat.
Being able to buy something other than food and pay bills doesn't make one a middle class, even low-middle, whatever this pseudoterm means.Say a lower-middle-class apartment
I bet most combat is avoidable.Regarding the third question, even if completing the entire game without killing is not possible, is it mostly avoidable or sometimes avoidable (like in The Witcher 3)?
That could simply boil down to it always being incredibly rare. I mean, only a handful of games allowed this before 2006 despite how many were released. Few games include children, and fewer still allow attacking random people.
Now that I think about it, Dragon's Dogma allowed you to kill anyone, children included. Everyone respawns eventually (presumably to keep you from being locked out of certain quests), but they're still very much dead in the moment.
Okay, but there's only one Shatner, so one of us is going to be at a serious disadvantage.
Being able to buy something other than food and pay bills doesn't make one a middle class, even low-middle, whatever this pseudoterm means.
They do specifically call out your ability to attack unarmed villagers in the rating summary. It'd be kind of silly if respawning gave them a pass on the children and not the adults.The fact everyone respawns is probably the only way they got away with it.
The change in developer likely had more to do with it considering that Oblivion released 9 days before that hearing, shares an engine with Fallout 3, and handled children in the exact same way. Also, I seem to remember reading that it was a conscious choice on their behalf because they were parents and simply didn't want to include it in their games, but I'm having trouble finding the source for that one.I know that even series which previously allowed it, like Fallout, dropped it after that hearing.
Fine. If we're playing dirty, then I choose a reflective ham basted to a reflective sheen, knowing full well that he'll be mesmerized by his reflection until he starves to death.You... will always... be... at a... disadvantage!