There is little reason to take sex out of all games. What about Dating sims for instance?
Some people like that sort of thing, instead of banning it just... not buy it yourself?
of course that wont stop parents and interfering people in the media/government that think they know a simple answer for everything.
Originally Posted by Random Cecil then the point remains. why have it at all? if you wanted the option to have it or not then you can buy or not buy the game. personally if the reason for having any type of obscene material in a movie or video game is purely for the sake of just having in there and doesnt actually contribute to the overall experience, why even have it? saying 'fuck' in a movie every 10 seconds doesnt help the movie. cursing without emotion is pointless, sex without reason is pointless, in media.
Well, let's say that we wern't talking about relationship/sex vs no-relationship/sex. Let's say we were talking about good ending vs evil ending. Why bother allowing the player to turn evil when they could just be the goody-two-shoos good guy? Because there are a wide verity of players and some people might choose to go down that path. That's not to say that one side enhances the narrative/game-play and another side degraids it. I'd say that the inclusion of both, if dune properly, would enhance the game. Because it allows the player to play there way.
Personally, that's a big thing with me. One of the things that really erked me about a lot of games, As speshaly adventure games and Japanese RPGs, is when no matter what you do or witch path you choose the story is, most of the time, set. Fore instance, there is no way to save Aeris in FF7 and in RotH you can't simply forgive Rebeca for lying to you.
I agree with you that swearing every second word is juvenile and having sex for no reason duesn't really contribute anything. But that would be the WRONG way to go about dealing with those things.
thats the thing though. having the choice to do good or evil in a game (fable, that crappy 3d megaman game for ps1, the legend of zelda series, star wars, etc etc) contributes HIGHLY to the gaming experience. if you do evil you cant do certain things, or certain people treat you differently, and in some cases ultimately change the overall ending of the game. but in an already amazing and awesome game such as god of war, they throw in a sex mini game (even though you dont completely see it) and for what? just to replenish your stats? it isnt needed. whatever happened to "stay at inn: xx gold"
Something I think you have to consider is that in our society, though I don't think were that repressed, sex is still taboo where as violence doesn't seem to be. So the hole moral Good Vs Evil thing has been allowed to develop over time. To the point where in some games it is a major selling point. Where as with intimacy has been kept in the dark.
Think back to the early days of gaming, there was no concept of wright or wrong with what you were doing, half the time you couldn't even tell what something was supposed to be. Now you can easily identify innocent victims form bad guys and make a choice between who you wont to side with. It's not in every game but then agen it wouldn't really be appropriate to have it in some games.
I agree that the sex in god of war is unnecessary, but the game itself is just a shallow 3D beat-em-up. I mean it's a fun game but Kratos is basically just James Bond in Ancient Grease with magic instead of gadgets, and way more psychotic.
The reason it didn't add anything to the main game is becouse it was put in as an afterthought. Also, I don't think Kratos is the kind of person who is capable of having a stable relationship with anyone.
"Oh, my god! A lightning monster just ripped out this poor woman's eyes, and your mocking her shrubbery!" - The Spoony One
thats my point. obscenity for the sake of obscenity is unnecessary. (ie god of war) but the whole good/evil thing, IN THOSE GAMES, is completely necessary, as the entire game depends on it. thats my point. if it doesnt need to be there, dont. don't try and fix what aint broked (breaking it in the process)
Originally Posted by Random Cecil thats my point. obscenity for the sake of obscenity is unnecessary. (ie god of war) but the whole good/evil thing, IN THOSE GAMES, is completely necessary, as the entire game depends on it. thats my point. if it doesnt need to be there, dont. don't try and fix what aint broked (breaking it in the process)
Maybe I'm not explaining this very well becouse I can see your point but you don't seem to be able to see mine. What I'm trying to get across is that if relationships, like with any element really, are designed into the game from the get go as a part of the core experience then it will make an impact on game play. Right now I can't actually think of a game where this is dune well, some have tried with varying levels of success. However I don't think that people should just give up on it becouse it's hard.
I was talking to an instructor of mine one time, about 7 years ago. He instructed part time but his main job was as a game designer. Back then he was preaching that games where a crappy medium for storytelling and that stories in games should be scraped altogether. All I can say is that I'm glad that this trend didn't catch on. I know that puzzle and casual games are fun and have there place but that doesn't mean that people should give up on telling a story eather.
"Oh, my god! A lightning monster just ripped out this poor woman's eyes, and your mocking her shrubbery!" - The Spoony One
Did he have a reason for thinking games are a crappy medium for storytelling?
I'd be amazed if anyone could come up with a good reason why games should not have stories in them...
Originally Posted by AndyUK Did he have a reason for thinking games are a crappy medium for storytelling?
I'd be amazed if anyone could come up with a good reason why games should not have stories in them...
Well, it was a long time ago but he seemed to think that stories and games didn't mix becouse one was passive entertainment while the other was interactive. I remember him saying the players wont to play not watch, witch is true. When another student asked him if he had ever picked up a game just becouse the story sounded cool he said never.
One of his main points was that games had tried to have stories in the past and that it didn't work. He thought that people didn't know how to wright a story in an interactive medium and that after trying so long (this was in 2001) only for most of it to be ignored or skipped over. He thought people should just give up on it. I think that's why that talk really sticks out in my mined. He spesificly said "don't bother with story, it's not important." A point on witch I, and others, strongly disagreed.
This guy was working for a company called Half-Brick and at the time they mostly maid Puzzle type games for the GBA. I don't know what there up to now.
"Oh, my god! A lightning monster just ripped out this poor woman's eyes, and your mocking her shrubbery!" - The Spoony One
who wouldnt want to be a PART of an epic experience. granted most of the stories are crap, but when you have some truly epic stories, its a grand experience when you actually get to advance the story yourself. what an ignorant game designer.
I've got a good reason why (commercial) games should scrap storylines sometimes - when their limited budget does not allow both talented coders/designers and talented writers at the same time. If one must be chosen over the other, i think they'd be best off scraping the story and concentrate on the actual game! This isn't a choice that has to be made often though.
Originally Posted by AndyUK Did he have a reason for thinking games are a crappy medium for storytelling?
I'd be amazed if anyone could come up with a good reason why games should not have stories in them...
Well, it was a long time ago but he seemed to think that stories and games didn't mix becouse one was passive entertainment while the other was interactive. I remember him saying the players wont to play not watch, witch is true. When another student asked him if he had ever picked up a game just becouse the story sounded cool he said never.
One of his main points was that games had tried to have stories in the past and that it didn't work. He thought that people didn't know how to wright a story in an interactive medium and that after trying so long (this was in 2001) only for most of it to be ignored or skipped over. He thought people should just give up on it. I think that's why that talk really sticks out in my mined. He spesificly said "don't bother with story, it's not important." A point on witch I, and others, strongly disagreed.
This guy was working for a company called Half-Brick and at the time they mostly maid Puzzle type games for the GBA. I don't know what there up to now.
If there were ever a game to convince me that games and stories do not mix it would be Assassin's creed. The perfect example of why you really need the right group of people to make it work. That game fit every nerd game story cliche in the book. Secret Society of assassins, check. Pointless matrix type futuristic theme, check. Random overexplanation of dna memories-whoknowswhat, check. On top of that you couldn't skip it.
Originally Posted by Mark Radon I've got a good reason why (commercial) games should scrap storylines sometimes - when their limited budget does not allow both talented coders/designers and talented writers at the same time. If one must be chosen over the other, i think they'd be best off scraping the story and concentrate on the actual game! This isn't a choice that has to be made often though.
I agree that not all games need or should have a story, I'm looking at you Need for Speed!! And it's the same with intimacy and sex. Not all games need it not all games should have it but that doesn't mean that we should give up on it.
"Oh, my god! A lightning monster just ripped out this poor woman's eyes, and your mocking her shrubbery!" - The Spoony One
Advertisement
