Oblivion's rating has been changed to "M": http://pc.ign.com/articles/704/704726p1.html)

I can't say I disagree with this change in the rating of the game. In fact I was a bit surprised that it got an initial T rating due to the dark nature of the story and some sidequests like the Dark Brotherhood in which cold blooded murder is encouraged. There's also the necromancy part per example. I think there are a lot adult themes in that game.

However, in order to render it's decision, the ESRB has taken into consideration "a locked skin allowing players to make their on-screen female heroes topless. A third-party modification unlocks the skin in the PC version." The other reason that made them change their mind was the "more detailed depictions of blood and gore than were considered in the original rating." (Note that I haven't seen the ESRB original decision - from experience, what appears in the news often tends to include only the few sentences that catch attention).

What really surprises me here is that it seems to be only the "graphical depiction of blood" and the topless female mod that made them change their minds. I'll never understand why cold blooded murder is fine as long as there is not too much blood and no boobs and why boobs are just wrong. (cold blooded murder sounds worse than the two others IMHO. As for the topless female skin, these ESBR guys should go to a beach in France...I'm really tired of this ridiculous puritanism).

Oh well we've heard all that before...but one of the things that really bothers me is Bethesda's answer (http://pc.ign.com/articles/704/704834p1.html): There is no nude female character in a section of the game that can be "unlocked." Bethesda can not control tampering with Oblivion by third parties. Bethesda is taking steps to ensure that modders can not continue to hack into Oblivion's art archives to create partially nude figures."

If the ESRB starts looking not just at the game content but at what 3rd parties can/cannot do with a game, and hold the devs accountable for this, I am afraid that the devs (not only Bethesda but generally speaking) will start to hardcode even more elements. Right now it is technically possible to make nude skins for almost every game...

It doesn't sound good for modders, nor it does for PC gaming...


What do you think?

i think the whole point was that there was topless skins for female characters left inside the game's data files. so, given that Oblivion is such an easy game to mod certainly didn't help the situation since those data files are hackable using the existing TES Construction Set, which is provided by Bethseda.

IMHO, the ESRB is well within the bounds to do what they did, and i applaud them for it since it keeps Congress from restarting the whole 'games are killing our kids' debate. in this case, i do think that Bethseda is at fault. if a developer can't go through the game files to verify that some questionable content hasn't been omitted from the final product, then they deserve what's coming.

if this ordeal had been the result of a mod that didn't unlock content that already existed in the game's data files, then i would be quite pissed off since it would put a damper on the modding potential of all future PC games. however, this isn't such a case, so i don't think its anything to be concerned with.

I'm guessing they _may_ have concerns about legal issues with young kids getting exposed to 'porn' mods, even if they don't make it or accept it. Welcome to lawsuit happy America, where everyone remotely associated with a product is sued, whether or not they were directly involved or even responsible. As long as someone has deep pockets, they're fair game. /sarcasm]
Or they may have made a philosophical decision to have everyone keep their clothes on.

We don't grow up seeing half naked women on beaches like in France, so we're not used to it. So, we're a little more hung up on boobs than other places are. It's part of the culture. Personally, I see nothing wrong with a little modesty. I prefer certain things to be left to my own imagination. ;)
Yes, I think it's idiotic to not rate something M if the character's running around killing people. I'm not sure how someone decided that it's OK for a 13 year old to murder someone on screen. I don't plan to let my kids play violent killing games when they're in their teens.
Of course, I think it's just kind of dumb to have a character running around topless if they're going to be in battle. I prefer some protection from armor, thank you.

I'll just quote my post I used in the Swamp, but it pretty much sums up my opinion ;)

---------------

Will this make the value of my software box go up? Mine says Rated "T" hehehe..

But yeah, this is ridiculous... unlike Hot Coffee where it's an entire "sex mini-game" that was *cough* 'forgotten' *cough*.. this modification is just a re-textured upperbody.nif (model) file used for humanoid beasts.. paint it flesh tone and yeah.. wheeeee boobies :rolleyes:

I think TegSkywalker summed it up about the whole point that "real" nekkid-ness is available rather easily.. who give's a rat's ass about pixelated ones...

Besides, like any good perv, I've checked out the mod.. needless to say there's an unnatural "gloss" to the ermm... "extras" because of Oblivion's drawing engine...hehehe... unless they've been rolling around in olive oil.. well, I've seen better :xp:

I think I'd be more worried over my kid seeing the disembodied & half-mutilated corpses in the game that are VERY highly detailed moreso than something they're bound to see in their lifetime sooner or later...

Of course I have no kids, so I won't "play parent" on the subject.. but it just seems a bit absurd for anyone with common sense.. :giveup:

Oblivion's rating has been changed to "M"

I can't say I disagree with this change in the rating of the game. In fact I was a bit surprised that it got an initial T rating due to the dark nature of the story and some sidequests like the Dark Brotherhood in which cold blooded murder is encouraged. There's also the necromancy part per example. I think there are a lot adult themes in that game.

However, in order to render it's decision, the ESRB has taken into consideration (snipped for brevity: harmless nudity, plenty of gore. Wanton murder and evil activities apparently OK)


What age does a "M" and "T" rating mean in North America? Over here Oblivion had a 16+ (Violence) PEGI (www.pegi.info) rating, which seems about right concidering the blood, gore and dark themes present in the game (Though they should have included a Fear icon as well due to the spider daedra, but that's just the arachnophobe in me speaking. :))

From a violence perspective it may be understandable, but I too have a hard time understanding how those people are thinking in regards to just showing some skin. I've not seen the mod in question, but it hardly seems like porn from that description. It's not like you won't see lots of people more lightly dressed than that just visiting a random beach during a hot summer's day. That should have no bearing on the rating of the game, really, unless they want to prevent women under a certain age from buying a mirror, or ban people under a certain age from going out during the summer for consistency.


Oh well we've heard all that before...but one of the things that really bothers me is Bethesda's answer (http://pc.ign.com/articles/704/704834p1.html):

If the ESRB starts looking not just at the game content but at what 3rd parties can/cannot do with a game, and hold the devs accountable for this, I am afraid that the devs (not only Bethesda but generally speaking) will start to hardcode even more elements.

Seems like it may be a good idea to hold off installing new patches for Oblivion in case they plan to lock down modding of the game. Fortunately they can't change the game I already have installed unless I let them. :)

Since pretty much any game that can be modded have nude skins and some mod that lets you do pretty despicable things all games would have to be rated "M" if potential 3rd party mods have to be a factor in rating games.

Since pretty much only one side is crying out loudly in (self)righteous indignation it's easy for developers to just cater to those who shout the loudest and create bad publicity and potentially lost sales for them. After all, the other side of that debate would buy the game either way. :)

Oh, and they should probably put an "Adult Only" rating on IE and Firefox as well, they can be used to view questionable content...

* * *

I think Bethesda are insane if they would prevent people from creating their own models and textures for the game. I would certainly boycott their "pay to download" addons if they did this. Some of the stuff that was made for Morrowind is very impressive, and I know for sure that I would not have bought the game, nor its expansion packs, at all if a few of those mods, the Better Bodies and Better heads mods had not been made. The original models were terrible, and ruined the game experience for me when I originally looked at the game when it was released.

At least the default character models in Oblivion aren't quite as bad as in Morrowind, though they look a tough too anorectic for my taste and they certainly aren't pretty. The textures are too low-res for the purpose as well, resulting in visible "dirt" in game. Nothing some baggy clothing and the face textures fix mod couldn't fix. :)

I think the whole thing is ridiculous.

Evry day you see topless womens on tv, but if there is one in a game they change the rating. I think thats kind of weird, for in the most movies there is a topless scene.

And it's just wrong to increase the age limit because of mods, you dont find a nude mod if you not looking for one

Evry day you see topless womens on tv, but if there is one in a game they change the rating. I think thats kind of weird, for in the most movies there is a topless scene.

And it's just wrong to increase the age limit because of mods, you dont find a nude mod if you not looking for one

Movies with a topless scene where you see every part of the anatomy (not just glimpses of part of it) are rated R, at least in the US, and you can't go in if you're 17 or under without a parent (theoretically). Yes, you can see full nudity on cable, but you're paying for that channel and have the option of blocking anything you consider objectionable. You don't see topless or nudes on network TV, Jackson's famous 'wardrobe failure' notwithstanding.

As a parent, I would like to know about content that my kid could 'accidentally' unlock and arrange for it to stay locked or remove it, or just not buy the game at all. Some things he doesn't need to see at his age, even if it is just cartoon violence or cartoon nudity.

What age does a "M" and "T" rating mean in North America? Over here Oblivion had a 16+ (Violence) PEGI rating, which seems about right concidering the blood, gore and dark themes present in the game (Though they should have included a Fear icon as well due to the spider daedra, but that's just the arachnophobe in me speaking. :))The "T" rating means 13+ and "M" rating means 17+.

lolz. M means 15+ here !

Ive just started playing Oblivion, and sure its fun, but I hardly see what all the hype is about. The way so many around here were carrying on about it I imagined unrivalled awesomeness. Lolz... pretty gfx only goes so far

Im looking forward to completing it, but NWN is *still* the greatest RPG in the universe :xp: [/BioWare Groupie]

mtfbwya

As a parent, I would like to know about content that my kid could 'accidentally' unlock and arrange for it to stay locked or remove it, or just not buy the game at all. Some things he doesn't need to see at his age, even if it is just cartoon violence or cartoon nudity.
Which is what any responsible parent would do, but is it necessary for the ESRB to raise the rating when no one pays attention to it? It seems to me that any 16-year-old who hasn't seen a breast won't be playing video games.

That may be the only thing they're doing

I think the whole issue is absurd. Morrowind had some of the best mods I've ever seen in a game, and was the only thing that kept me playing it after several playthroughs. Oblivion is capable of having even better mods than Morrowind, since the game has been vastly improved, and then Bethesda wants to limit the amount of mods than can be made just to keep a few idiots who need a video game to satisfy their lust from making some topless female skins? This sounds like a mistake on Bethesda's part. People will probably be more willing to buy the game years from now if there is a large amount of mods available for it. In the mean time, I agree with stoffe and think I'll hold off from downloading any patches for Oblivion.

That's the dumbest thing ever!!! ESRB: We're making this "M" because of the topless
girl you might find, not because of killing, or The Dark Brotherhood, or the dark setting, some helpless teen might find it and be scarred for life! Oh no! There were third party mods for Morrowind that made everyone nude, it's still "T". God, I HATE
them, the most ridiculous ratings on the planet, and some teen will be like: Ok! Time to buy Oblivion! This'll be fun! What it's "M"!?!? Then he'll grow up a cold-harded murderer. Bad move guys, very bad move...

That may be the only thing they're doingProbably, but they're most likely so sheltered that they're playing Kingdom Hearts 2 or something.

i think the whole point was that there was topless skins for female characters left inside the game's data files. so, given that Oblivion is such an easy game to mod certainly didn't help the situation since those data files are hackable using the existing TES Construction Set, which is provided by Bethseda.

IMHO, the ESRB is well within the bounds to do what they did, and i applaud them for it since it keeps Congress from restarting the whole 'games are killing our kids' debate. in this case, i do think that Bethseda is at fault. if a developer can't go through the game files to verify that some questionable content hasn't been omitted from the final product, then they deserve what's coming.

if this ordeal had been the result of a mod that didn't unlock content that already existed in the game's data files, then i would be quite pissed off since it would put a damper on the modding potential of all future PC games. however, this isn't such a case, so i don't think its anything to be concerned with.The braless model is there only to avoid clipping issues with having the bra show through the clothes, and at no point in normal Oblivion play would you ever see a totally naked character. The model itself is just there so they didn't have to create an individual torso for every female character in the game. They just layer the clothes (or, if no clothes are worn, a bra) over the generic $race$ female body mesh. IMO, that is nothing to even consider when rating a game. It's not remotely 'questionable content'; it's just how the game works underneath. It's fully textured in the sense that it's covered with a texture so that when a bra model is used it looks correct. Tell me why they should avoid drawing the slight bit that is covered by the bra model when it surely changes along with body size? They drew it all so they didn't need to worry about parts of the model being untextured when the bra changes. May I remind you that there's no nipple? Quite simply, I think it's just rediculous puritanism, based on no reasonable explanation, that may indeed have an adverse impact on both my and other's ability to mod the game.

Oblivion does have some heavy violence in it for a teen game though. It definitely pushes the edge. However, the ESRB should have rated it M for that when it was rating it, not later. Changing the rating afterwards just makes people question whether the ESRB is actually doing anything. "What's the rating?" "It's Teen." "Oh, haha. You can't fool me. What's the REAL rating? You know, the one they're going to change it to in a couple of months?"

I venture to suggest that such behavior from the ESRB does not help keep the government out of ratings - in fact, I think it does the opposite.

Which is what any responsible parent would do, but is it necessary for the ESRB to raise the rating when no one pays attention to it? It seems to me that any 16-year-old who hasn't seen a breast won't be playing video games.

If it's M, at least theoretically an adult has to buy it, which means theoretically someone is at least looking at the box before it's getting purchased. There is a difference between seeing a breast in health class and seeing a breast in a sexually provocative scene. I highly doubt that the modded topless gals in the game are there for us to be educated on breast anatomy. :)

Edit--OK, I can live with Barbie-doll type topless if that's being used for a clothing base, though they could have put a strapless bra on or something if they didn't want the straps to show.

And I agree the M rating should have been more for violence than anything else.

I'm guessing this also means I have to run out and get the Teen one now because they might block modding? If you could re-create the stuff that happens in Oblivion then it should be "M" but, if a kid goes up to his teacher and attempts to soul-trap them, then that kid just can't tell fake from reality then it's the kid's problem, not the game's.

If it's M, at least theoretically an adult has to buy it, which means theoretically someone is at least looking at the box before it's getting purchased. There is a difference between seeing a breast in health class and seeing a breast in a sexually provocative scene. I highly doubt that the topless gals in the game are there for us to be educated on breast anatomy. :)You're right. What would happen if you took your health class book and used it for, shall we say, purposes for which it was not designed? Would that action be the wrong, and NOT THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE? As it happens to be in this instance? The book is not the thing that is the problem. It's people's use of the book.

The mesh has a legitimate use in the engine. The appeal to the prurient interest by the mod does not. See the similarity?

You're right. What would happen if you took your health class book and used it for, shall we say, purposes for which it was not designed? Would that action be the wrong, and NOT THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE? As it happens to be in this instance? The book is not the thing that is the problem. It's people's use of the book.

The mesh has a legitimate use in the engine. The appeal to the prurient interest by the mod does not. See the similarity?

Yep, and editted above accordingly. I didn't see your post til after I'd already posted mine. :)

This is a bit off topic but is there anyway to mod the Xbox Morrowind, I just got the game of the year edition, they took out the glitches and exploites and when I fight the gaurds they say stoopid, spelled just like that. I want to change that.

If it's M, at least theoretically an adult has to buy it, which means theoretically someone is at least looking at the box before it's getting purchased.
If a kid got I.D.'d trying to buy an M rated game I'd be quite surprised. I have a good set of M games, and no one ever asked me if I was old enough. There is a difference between seeing a breast in health class and seeing a breast in a sexually provocative scene. I highly doubt that the modded topless gals in the game are there for us to be educated on breast anatomy.

The difference isn't going to stop nerds who can't get a date (and even if it did they could just use Google). But when the ESRB comes in it'll stop the people who don't need a handful of pixels to have fun and just want to get the Sword of Improved It Go Boom +6.

What do you think?
I think this all is a bunch of *Insert colorful metaphors here*!

I'm with you on being tired of the prudes here in the US. :disaprove

Bethesda's response was also wrong, and makes me think twice before buying another of their products because they cave in to this kind of crap so easily. If they start to disallow modding that is a big mistake, and will only hurt themselves.

I would say more but a lot of what I wanted to say has been said. ;)

For some reason, many Americans seem to be afraid of boobs.

For some reason, many Americans seem to be afraid of boobs.

That's because they're pissed that they've never seen real ones. Thus, their holy vengence is directed at modding since there's nothing else that's weak enough to attack.

This is something I find stupid. I've seen boobs before I got to 18. Hell, I've touched female breasts. And they're telling me that I can't see some pixels before 18? Hell, I'm pretty sure that NOT seeing breasts, even in games, will make you go crazy at some point and turn you into a cold-blooded murderer.

I agree with D333's point about violence vs nudity. Seeing a boob is worse then killing people. There's something inherently wrong in that idea. Saying that a simple harmless and totally natural thing is worse the violence is seriously lacking any kind of logic.

For some reason, many Americans seem to be afraid of boobs.
We're not afraid of boobs.. we have the 2 biggest ones running our Country :xp: hehehe...

America is SO backwards... destruction and blood and guts and murder is fine but woe unto you if you show boobs!! This country often makes me nauseous with its puritanical BS.

I just learned that even the mod itself just uses a male chest texture (which has a nipple, OMG! That should be classed as pr0n!) applied to a female body mesh. The texture had to be purposefully switched by the user (renamed and placed in a different folder) for any 'nudity' other than the Barbie doll kind to exist. Technically, it was 'in the shipped game,' and that's what they're using to defend their decision. ESRB == Idiots. Makes you wonder how they're supposed to even rate the games when they have no idea what's going on in the first place.

Stupid puritans, afraid of boobs!:xp:......
ZOMG! Violence! How uncivilized:eek:

If someone broke into my house and threatened my family I'd slit his throat with my bare hands.

You don't know what's wrong. You don't know what's right. When you write the book on the subject please send me a copy, I could use a good laugh.
Those who are offended by nudity (even if it isn't true nudity in this particular game) have just as much right to protect their children from what they consider harm as you do your children or your own mind.

So quit whining about how stupid and backward everyone else is when there's absolutely no way that you yourself are perfect.

If someone broke into my house and threatened my family I'd slit his throat with my bare hands.

Totally different situation. Self-defense is very different from cold-blooded murder and you know it.

You don't know what's wrong. You don't know what's right. When you write the book on the subject please send me a copy, I could use a good laugh.
Those who are offended by nudity (even if it isn't true nudity in this particular game) have just as much right to protect their children from what they consider harm as you do your children or your own mind.

Sure they do. Watch what kind of MODS your kids download. Oblivion "vanilla" is not porn and is not meant to contain any nudity. It was a mod. Hell, we're talking PC mod here. If your kid can download some pixelated boobs for game, he can download porn. There's no way the parent can "protect" them if that's the case.

So quit whining about how stupid and backward everyone else is when there's absolutely no way that you yourself are perfect.

Of course no one is perfect and I hear nobody claiming that he or she holds ultimate truth. However, on balance of "morality" and what is harmful, boobs are very low except for crazy puritans. I've never heard of boobs murdering people or corrupting the thoughts of teenagers...errr wait...
Well, you know what I'm saying anyway, boobs are not evil. Gratuitous violence is.

"I agree with D333's point about violence vs nudity. Seeing a boob is worse then killing people. There's something inherently wrong in that idea. Saying that a simple harmless and totally natural thing is worse the violence is seriously lacking any kind of logic."
-LIAYD

Funny, I didn't see you make any distinction between Self-defense and cold-blooded murder. If you attacked me and, after a bloody fight, I broke your neck, would you call my actions violent?

"Sure they do. Watch what kind of MODS your kids download. Oblivion "vanilla" is not porn and is not meant to contain any nudity. It was a mod. Hell, we're talking PC mod here. If your kid can download some pixelated boobs for game, he can download porn. There's no way the parent can "protect" them if that's the case."

As SD stated, there is a braless model existing in-game for the purpose of efficiency and functionality, I probably would've done the same thing (and added cylinders to other models so my character is more realistic to:lol:), but someone trying to mod their first game could find something their guardians don't want them to be exposed to, without ever downloading a pornographic mod. But the fact remains that something exists in the game which certain parties may find offensive, I know rating boards can't please everyone, but if they aren't going above and beyond the call of duty then why do they have jobs? The small (M: Realistic Violence, Drug Abuse) is helpful for a first impression, but there should be a more thourough analysis available for those who want it.

"Well, you know what I'm saying anyway, boobs are not evil. Gratuitous violence is."

I didn't say boobs were evil, my posed question is "what makes the purpose of the presentation of those boobs any more or less evil than violence?"

"However, on balance of "morality" and what is harmful, boobs are very low except for crazy puritans"

Please explain this statement.:)

RJM I would take the time to explain it, but you seem to always want to argue with everything everyone says, so whats the point?

Funny, I didn't see you make any distinction between Self-defense and cold-blooded murder. If you attacked me and, after a bloody fight, I broke your neck, would you call my actions violent?

Did I need to make one? I don't think so. The distinction is common knowledge and one would think everyone knows about it.


As SD stated, there is a braless model existing in-game for the purpose of efficiency and functionality, I probably would've done the same thing (and added cylinders to other models so my character is more realistic to:lol:), but someone trying to mod their first game could find something their guardians don't want them to be exposed to, without ever downloading a pornographic mod. But the fact remains that something exists in the game which certain parties may find offensive, I know rating boards can't please everyone, but if they aren't going above and beyond the call of duty then why do they have jobs? The small (M: Realistic Violence, Drug Abuse) is helpful for a first impression, but there should be a more thourough analysis available for those who want it.

You have to assemble it yourself. The braless models contains no nipples.

You realize that at this rate, every existing game should get an M rating? Such actions open the Pandora's Box of censorship. Now, developers almost have to fight against modders to avoid any nude mods ever coming out. Hey, there's some nude mods for Sid Meier's Pirates, never heard about that getting an M rating. Hell, name a lot of games and there's nude mods.



I didn't say boobs were evil, my posed question is "what makes the purpose of the presentation of those boobs any more or less evil than violence?"

Please explain this statement.:)


I did. You just ignored that part.

If someone broke into my house and threatened my family I'd slit his throat with my bare hands.You can't slit someone's throat with your bare hands...

what makes the purpose of the presentation of those boobs any more or less evil than violence?I've never turned on the news and heard "...earlier today, a 28 year-old man was beaten to death by a pair of boobs. Traces of silicone were found on his corpse and police are attempting to trace the source of it..." I've also never heard of boobs causing serious injury to others, and my aunt (who's a nurse) has never seen someone in the emergency room for boob-related injuries.

I have, however, heard about people being stabbed, shot, beaten, or otherwise brutalized and scarred (physically and mentally) for the rest of their lives.

It seems to me that any 16-year-old who hasn't seen a breast won't be playing video games.

Over the course of my 32 years, I've met no end of 16-year-old boys glued to their computer screens 23 hours a day who, if confronted by a naked woman, would probably scamper off in panic to find a first-aid kit. :D

I've seen this kind of debate in so many media sources, and I always think the same thing. This is going on in a country where a split-second flash of a partially naked boob during the Superbowl caused mass outrage. No offence, but remember, America (as a country) was originally formed by people who got kicked out of England for being too uptight.

Over the course of my 32 years, I've met no end of 16-year-old boys glued to their computer screens 23 hours a day who, if confronted by a naked woman, would probably scamper off in panic to find a first-aid kit. :D
Only if they're confronted by a real naked woman, 'cause that kind of guys like to look at teh pr0n when they can.
I've seen this kind of debate in so many media sources, and I always think the same thing. This is going on in a country where a split-second flash of a partially naked boob during the Superbowl caused mass outrage. No offence, but remember, America (as a country) was originally formed by people who got kicked out of England for being too uptight.
It was also formed by teh witchezzes!!!1!11!!!1one!1one

No offence, but remember, America (as a country) was originally formed by people who got kicked out of England for being too uptight.We kicked their asses out a while back. The ones we're dealing with now are the sheltered ones :xp:

America (as a country) was originally formed by people who got kicked out of England for being too uptight.

They didnt get kicked out, they fled because the Catholic controlled government was persecuting them for not being catholic. It was either catholic or protestant controlled at the time. I cant remember which. Since the two sects took turns jailing and executing each other. lol

I beleive you meen the church of England

They didnt get kicked out, they fled because the Catholic controlled government was persecuting them for not being catholic. It was either catholic or protestant controlled at the time. I cant remember which. Since the two sects took turns jailing and executing each other. lol

As Samnmax said, C of E, not Catholic. Think King Henry VIII. The Pilgrims were Protestants who were even more Protestant than the ones in charge.

But my point was, this instinctual "sex and nudity are evil" response to (in this case) pixelated boobs runs very deep in the US. The Religious Right are more powerful than ever at the moment, and the media are all terrified of running afoul of them. One could make a good case for the separation of Church and State breaking down these days--bad news for anyone who actually values the freedoms the Pilgrims left England to establish.

@Aash, Yup, my brother says I'm "contrary", I prefer "socially aggressive, short tempered, conflictphiliac, with overcritical tendencies, and paranoid disbelief of imposed reality" or s.a.s.t.c.w.o.t.a.p.d.o.i.r.ial for short.
And besides, it's so much more interesting to argue about something than to just get all bandwagonjumpy fanboyish about whatever the current topic of discussion happens to be.
That's reality, pure unclarified comedy;)

@LIAYD, What distinction? Self defense and murder can have the same level of violence. Both are killing?

Like I said, putting a rating on something can only handle so much (you'd run out of room on the box) but there should be an analysis system detailed enough for someone who would require it.

"I did. You just ignored that part."

No. You simply didn't use enough detail and description to warrant me being interested enough to take it seriously.;)

@jmac, Well, probably more of a tearing/ripping sort of action, but I prefer the way "slit" rolls of the tongue (or in this case, fingers).

"I've never..."

That's because you're confusing the literal aplications of the two, and for some reason assuming that a physical "boob" is the problem.

"I have however..."

So, extramarital affairs have never scarred anyone mentally or physically for the rest of their lives?
Breasts, however, are lethal weapons:lol:

@Mace, Yeah, the superbowl thing was kinda funny. I was in the kitchen getting snacks at the time cuz halftime shows usually suck:D

@Hal, "Teh pr0n"

*gasp* You totally don't sound like you're speaking from experience in said group!;)

@jmac pt.2, Yup, the ones hiding in shelters, and the spiritual warlords you just can't change:twogun:

'ats why I'm watcha call non-denominational:xp:

Sex is good, it's misuse is not.

"the media are all terified of running afoul of them"

:rofl: :lol: :rofl: Best funny all day! You must read one of the only "Right" newspapers and watch one of the only "Right" television channels! How did you find it?

Aash Li was right. It's pointless to "argue" with you. You can't come up with decent arguments or veer off the topic.

@REDJOHNNYMIKE-
You're missing my point. I'm saying one is, by definition, the act of harming or killing another, the other is not. If you don't agree that harming/killing another human being is worse, you should schedule some sort of neurological examination.

If I had kids, I wouldn't want them to play this game because of the violence and I think the M rating is appropriate. Some quests wouldn't make me want to let a 13yr old kid play that game. I think about the numerous mutilated corpses you find everywhere but more particularily in Oblivion (the corpses that hang upside down suspended from the ceilings), the Dark Brotherhood quests in which cold blooded murder is not only encouraged but praised (in one scene near the end of the quest the murder is also particularly savage...you don't get to see the murder but you get to see the results and the npcs comment on it...) and some other scenes. It's not just the images but the dialogue and the context. If those violence elements were not there, and if it was just for the topless female model included in the .bsa's, I wouldn't mind letting my kids (if I had some) play the game.


Not only the topless model could not be accessed without a third party mod/and or third party tools downloadable from the net but it had nothing to do with porn (nothing to see with the "hot coffee" sex game, which was pretty tasteless for a video game IMHO). It was not a disrespectful and degrading representation of the female body. It wasn't an entirely nude model and it wasn't there for sexual purposes but for art and functionality reasons: they needed a model without a bra for some outfits such as the huntsman vest. As long as it's not vulgar, I don't have a problem with it. The human body in itself is not wrong and everyone knows what it looks like. It's the context and what you do with the human body that matters. I think nudity is too often confused with vulgarity and/or porn.


The funniest part in this story is the way in which Bethesda has dealth with the problem: I didn't installed the patch so this is just hearsay but it seems that they fixed the issue by removing the nipples from the texture... :lol: nipples = nudity, no nipples = "kid safe". We are using fig leaves again when even the Vatican removes them: most of the clothes added by Daniele da Volterra in the mid 16th century to Michelangelo's frescos in the Sistine Chapel's were removed during the restoration of the chapel in the 80-90's... the ceiling of the Chapel now features fully naked figures.

Nevertheless, the ERSB letter published here (http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1029393176&postcount=88)
) seems to be good news for modders:


It is inevitable that some may disagree with the ESRB’s actions in this instance. We simply ask those who disagree to consider that consumers, especially parents, count on ESRB ratings for reliable and accurate information about what’s in a computer or video game. They deserve to know what they are buying, and the ESRB is both obligated and committed to providing the most reliable and accurate ratings information possible. If content that would affect a rating is left on a game disc, even if it is not intended to be accessible during normal gameplay, it must be considered in the assignment of that rating. On the other hand, many mods actually introduce new content into a game that was created by a third party and not the publisher. These mods are beyond the publisher’s control, and therefore cannot reasonably or practically be considered in the assignment of ratings.

As Samnmax said, C of E, not Catholic. Think King Henry VIII. The Pilgrims were Protestants who were even more Protestant than the ones in charge.

But my point was, this instinctual "sex and nudity are evil" response to (in this case) pixelated boobs runs very deep in the US. The Religious Right are more powerful than ever at the moment, and the media are all terrified of running afoul of them. One could make a good case for the separation of Church and State breaking down these days--bad news for anyone who actually values the freedoms the Pilgrims left England to establish.

There is a little confusion on what the 'Religious Right' views as 'evil. I suppose I fall into the theological definition of 'Religious Right', though don't follow all the tenets of their social platform. Some things in the social platform can be silly, and some things are very serious attempts to keep the culture out of the toilet before we totally flush ourselves. The separation of church and state issue is fascinating, and I could have a long chat about that, but that's another thread.

Sex and nudity are not inherently evil to the 'Religious Right'. If it were, none of us would have any kids because we'd a. never get naked and further, b. never have sex. Since many of us have managed to reproduce (whether you want that or not) without artificial or Immaculate assistance, we've probably figured out that this is not an evil thing. Most of us are not prudes, most of us simply decide that sex and nudity are private, special, and not to be treated with the disrespect of a casual 'hook-up'

What is a problem is the intent of the image of a breast or other anatomy. If it's meant to be educational or for breastfeeding, I have no issues for it. My kids will see age-appropriate materials on human anatomy when they ask me or hubby about it or in health class, whichever comes first.

However, if my kids wanted to see a Playboy magazine, I'd have a big problem with it, because the intent of Playboy and other materials in that vein are to be erotic. The intent is not education (despite what anyone says about the articles), it's purely about creating sexual excitement. I object to breasts being imaged for this purpose, and I'm not even going to touch on the sexual exploitation of women problem.

The problem with the US isn't prudery about breasts. The problem is that we in the US are not able to differentiate the non-sexual connotations about breasts from the sexual. Other countries have the ability to view it as a non-sex organ and not get all nutsoid about it, but Americans don't.

If a game is an educational one, then I don't have an issue with naked people. Most games don't fall in that category. If there's a naked woman in a game, the probability is very low that she's there to provide a tutorial on breast anatomy. As a parent, I want the option of deciding whether it's appropriate for my child to see a naked woman/man or hardcore violence or gore (regardless of whether the rating is actually enforced at an individual store).

Once they're 18 and out of the house (whichever comes later) then they will hopefully have matured physically, emotionally, and mentally enough to make appropriate decisions on their own. Until that time, it's my job (for my kids) to sift through the various games to decide whether something is going to be played in my house. I can't do that without some guidelines. I don't have time to play every game, and I sure don't want to put money in the pocket of someone creating a porn game just to find out if it's OK or not.

So yes, I'm fine with ESRB making an arbitrary decision about where breasts fall on the rating continuum and whether it's equivalent to violence/gore. I'd also rather they take a very conservative view on ratings than liberal. I'd rather a parent make a choice to ignore a rating they consider too conservative than a kid to get a game that's clearly not appropriate for them because the ratings were too liberal.

I have no problem with mature 16+ or 18+ ratings on games featuring nudity or graphic violence, but the whole concept of rating a game as such if the potential for third-party modding to create nudity or violence within an game that didn't include it out of the box is just plain over the top. I'm not opposed to the idea of simply HAVING a rating system, but c'mon. Jae, we're both parents here. A ratings system can't do our jobs for us.

And yes, obviously all these "Religious Right" people that I generically referred to didn't all get here by being beamed down by aliens or something. I actually was aware that even people who hold conservative attitudes about sexuality do, in fact, not reproduce asexually. I don't mean to insult you Jae, but I wasn't under the impression you and Jimbo underwent cellular fission, or released your spores into the prevailing winds. When I say "Religious Right", I was (perhaps foolishly) referring to the political force that currently dominates the US federal government. These are the people that, IMHO, have crossed the line between expressing their spiritual beliefs and ramming them down everyone else's throats.

Sorry Mace, some of my post was pretty tongue-in-cheek but I was wiped out last night getting home from flying across 2 time zones to attend a 3 day conference in the beautiful Cascades. It wasn't meant to be insulting. I just forgot to put in some smilies to make that more clear. :) Your idea of reproduction via spores was very amusing.

I actually feel like the ultra-liberal left is ramming its politics down my throat. I was the token Democrat in my professional school (they all thought I was just this side of communist, and I'm pretty centrist :) ), so I'm no stranger to politics on either side of the liberal/conservative fence. I far prefer the politics of Lieberman to someone way out in left field like Dean.

I know the game creators can't control what 3rd party modders do. I wouldn't doubt there are some very 'unique' mods of Kotor floating around out there (and no, I really don't want to know :) ).

I think this game should have been rated M to begin with for violence, not for the possibility of a modder to draw in obscene skins. If you can easily make people naked in a game, however, I think that should also have an M rating.

I know the rating system doesn't do the job completely--it requires reading reviews of the game and doing a little research, and I have no problem doing that, but some parents do--they're either not adequately involved (by choice or unfortunate circumstances like severe illness), don't care, or simply don't understand. No system is ever going to be perfect. However, you can only put so much info on the back of the box, and that's intended to sell the game, not inform parents about reasons not to buy the game for their kids. And I know some kids can go into some stores and buy a game regardless of rating and age. Wally-world got in some trouble (or at least made it to the news) a few years back for selling M games to under-aged. Not to mention that if my kids go to a friend's house and they have the game, my kids might see something they shouldn't.

However, a rating system is better than nothing, and I'd rather it was a little conservative. If a kid has parents who just don't care to check these things out, at least the kids will theoretically be prevented from buying material they really shouldn't be seeing at that age. If a kid can't buy a game and the parent thinks it's OK, then fine, let the parent buy the game. I'm not trying to be cavalier here about teenagers, many of whom display greater judgment skills than some of the adults I see, but I'm not too concerned about a 13 year old being 'inconvenienced' in buying a game.

Truth is, statistically, 9 out of 10 games are bought by adults according to some research I forgot about. I'll try and find the link. Obviously, even if we put an M rating on everything, items will get through for sure.