There are too many harsh worlds in games for my taste now.
Can you imagine just *one* "non-harsh" world in recent RPGs ? I can't.
On the other hand the cliché goes like this : A harsh world *needs* a hero, that's why a hero is most likely to become a hero within any harsh world, and nowhere else.
I think that's why so many game environments are so similar.
You didn't play Paper Mario then?
I'm not really following.
I suppose we need a definition if you think the post-apoc setting of Fallout is the standard for RPGs. It's not so much that it's harsh, as I agree that aspect is widespread these days - but it's that it's much closer to our own world in terms of what would happen if we had a major nuclear war.
Fantasy worlds like the one in Lord of the Rings, World of Warcraft, Oblivion, Baldur's Gate, etc. are so removed from reality that it wouldn't make sense to try and implement too much reality.
even in a harsh world (fantasy or historic) only the deranged commit violent acts against children.
its ironic that only adults would be able to play a game where children could be violently killed. if everything is 'on the table' to make a realistic game world why not have other games. you could have a game where you play a kkk member and get to hang 'blacks' and do all kinds of things to them under the guise of 'role playing' in a believable environment. or lets have a game that lets you play hitler. all of these are just as justifiable, and even more so since they are historic, sadly, than a game where you can commit violence against children. but who would buy these games-racists. and so you have to ask yourself why do you need to 'remove an 8-year olds spinal cord."--which by the way is the only reason i started and will continue at it until people stop posting thoughtless justifications for it.
on a lighter note i googled "abuse against children" and the forth link down is this extensive report/article on "violence in cyberspace" pertaining to children. it doesn't deal primarly with games, or virtual characters, but if you read the whole thing i doubt you'll have to much morale left to lead a charge for the freedom to 'kill children' in games.
http://ecpat.net/EI/PDF/ICT/Violence_in_Cyberspace_ENG.pdf
Well if you cannot differentiate between reality & fiction
curiously undead
the "logic" which you lads have used to poke holes in my wide net is unavoidable. still there is strength and merit in it. what has no strength and i'll make this post short so you can handle a response this time and not avoid it. is a logic answer to anything, real or not, because we can? that is the ONLY reason given for why child killing should be in a game.
as they say you can't have your cake and eat it too. you want a game where you can do whatever you want, but a coward knows full well, that hes more likely to try to get away with stuff if there are no true consequences. like the web we can all have more 'balls' and say what were thinking, with much less fear of consequence than were we in a public place. this board in itself is half reality then itself. a game only takes it further and we all know who is nieve or denial if you think developers are going to dole out a realistic punishment for heinous actions in a game. what good is a realistic simiulation if you can just reload a save.