|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Fallout 3 - Full Skill List

Default Fallout 3 - Full Skill List

July 10th, 2008, 12:53
You didn't play Paper Mario then?
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#61

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 12:55
Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer View Post
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 clichι 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.
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.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#62

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,415

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 12:58
Originally Posted by woges View Post
You didn't play Paper Mario then?
I don't have any consoles.


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
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.

*BEEP* … I just deleted my reply …


In short : Fallout has a very distinvct "harsh world", but nevertheless it complies to a general concept of "harsh world -> hero development", so to say.

All role playing games I know follow this concept. There is no exceptio I'd know of.

Because developers assume that anything else would be boring and not suppport the growth of an unknown person into a hero.

“ Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage – to move in the opposite direction.“ (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Last edited by Alrik Fassbauer; July 10th, 2008 at 13:07.
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR

#63

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 15,972

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 19:10
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…rspace_ENG.pdf

The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt

he who tries to make a point
misses the point
every time
- Ariel Pink
curiously undead is offline

curiously undead

curiously undead's Avatar
tuned to a different freq

#64

Join Date: May 2007
Location: standing under everyone
Posts: 812

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 21:38
Look up abuse against any type of human, you'll find it.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#65

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 22:04
Originally Posted by curiously undead View Post
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…rspace_ENG.pdf
It's important to think about this without becoming overly emotional.

If you really think it's about some kind of inner need to rip spinal cords off children, then I think you have a seriously compromised perception of the consumer supporting the idea of realistic tragedy and violence.

The horror of the act is precisely what will make people think and react, rather than pretending nothing horrible happens in the world.

We already have games which enable you to play Hitler, and I can definitely see good points about making games that teach people about the horrors of war and racism.

As I said, it's about putting the right content in the right games. I don't support making children killable in Fallout 3, because I don't believe Bethesda are capable of making a game that's authentic or intelligent enough to represent the right context for such actions. But I don't think it's inherently wrong to enable players with the power to commit horrible acts of violence or abuse.

It simply depends on how you treat your subject matter.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#66

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,415

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 22:35
actual while emotion may not belong in most debate/conversations, its entirely core to this one. or rather the lack of emotion on most of your parts. again and with a straight face read read jdr's original post. is everyone that desensitized and lacking of emotion, not to mention a uterus, that seeing those words written in ANY context will bother you? not only has it not bothered anyone else, people are only chiming in defense of it whether abstract or not.

again your argue to some non existance person. i'm not advocating a lack of horror, only a graphically realistic simulation of it, not an abstract one. specifically towards children.

name a game where you can play hitler, stick jews in an oven, etc etc.
because if is conceivable it has every right to be in a game according to the gamers bill of rights.

as i said i'm almost positive no one in this thread who has argued for child violence is female, and also at least a majority if not all, do not have children of their own.

on mother's day then you'll all be fine if i send a transcript of this thread to your moms, and if they're not still living my condolensces.

in nature, despite normal parenting, even different species sometimes take of others young. one type of animal that often doesn't however and for certain reasons will kill its young is birds. i always though 'bird brained' meant something entirely different—now i know better i suppose.


i'm a big believer in grey, though this is just one of the issues that merits no "subjective" interpretations.

oh and one liners are great, they are the hallmark of thoughtfulness, and a commitment to understanding.

by the way the mods should probably move the thread as i don't want to distract from those who mainly come to the site for news.

The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt

he who tries to make a point
misses the point
every time
- Ariel Pink
curiously undead is offline

curiously undead

curiously undead's Avatar
tuned to a different freq

#67

Join Date: May 2007
Location: standing under everyone
Posts: 812

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 22:59
Well if you cannot differentiate between reality & fiction me going into a long discussion with you is a fairly pointless act. I'm not here to tell you what you can and cannot think anyway. Killing isn't a particularly moral act be it children or adults, white or black the list goes on. Fictional content just doesn't have the same gravitas as anything in reality to me what the rest of you decide is totally up to you. Whatever your opinion I'll let you decide what's right for you, we're not going to agree here and I don't really need your help on the issue of morality.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#68

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 23:08
Oh and I never made 'child killer' in Fallout 2 even though I patched them back into my censored UK edition.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#69

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 23:09
Originally Posted by woges View Post
Well if you cannot differentiate between reality & fiction
My long-held theory is that our unconsciousness can't differentiate, too.

But - how do we *really* know ? How do we ask it if this *really* is the case ?

Through hypnosis ?

And: Most people don't believe anyway in *any* noticeable impact of our unconsciousness on us …
Which is kind of a sign of the belief we hold about the composition of our selves …

“ Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage – to move in the opposite direction.“ (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR

#70

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 15,972

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 23:21
Couldn't care less that there is no 'child killing' in the game as it's something that I don't think I've ever tried to do in a game and don't think I ever will.

But the real issue is no wind and rain!? Seriously, all this talk of immersion and great graphics yet no wind and rain? Please someone tell me why! I demand to have some Bo.. wind and rain!
LionHearted is offline

LionHearted

Traveler

#71

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 23:26
So what if it can't? A human being isn't only functioning via unconscious means, that would be a zombie, your ability to be socially acceptable certainly doesn't come from the ID. Isn't fantasy used in therapy as an acceptable method of treating anger and it's ilk?
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#72

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

July 10th, 2008, 23:29
Yes it is, but what I meant is that everyday effects on the unconscious part of us are mostly not scientifically researched.

“ Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage – to move in the opposite direction.“ (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR

#73

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 15,972

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 05:45
hey woges, do you understand empathy? i'm not talking about morality. empathy isn't a right or wrong issue its simply an understanding of others. its a painful exercise which often causes self-affliction in path to try and relate to the subject that is suffering. it doesn't make me a 'better' person. i'm simply dissapointed that you guys aren't showing empathy. it doesn't matter if its reality or not. say your uncle was 'tortured' in a pow camp, or had a limb removing accident. maybe your friend was sexually assaulted in a bar. it would therefore be unempathic if you watched a movie or played a game with them that in some way relived those events. most wouldn't, and some if they knew that had happened, wouldn't be able to watch them even alone without at least a pause or a thought or maybe shut it off. take that further know to global suffering. what one section of society is the weakest, can't speak for themselves, provide shelter for themselves, and or survive without the rest of us—children. so then anytime maybe whether its real or not seeing an act against them might trigger an empathic response? if you ignore then the reality in life where the bad events happen, the suffering of children every second on this earth, and don't establish an empathic link there, then yes i can totally agree and see how if its just a game then sure there's no bridge.

The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt

he who tries to make a point
misses the point
every time
- Ariel Pink
curiously undead is offline

curiously undead

curiously undead's Avatar
tuned to a different freq

#74

Join Date: May 2007
Location: standing under everyone
Posts: 812

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 07:48
curiously undead
You're arguing from the basis of your emotional response to the concept in question.

As such, you're incapable of looking at this from a logical point of view - as is obvious by your statement that we're not women or mothers - as if that was a prerequisite for any feature to be implemented. Your entire last post is pretty much about the assumption that we don't have empathy or can't imagine horrible events and their effects, which is the same as saying you're totally unaware that it's possible to have empathy and understanding, and yet still support the depiction of such events if handled appropriately.

The crux of your point is basically that because something hurts us emotionally, or could potentially hurt someone else - we should simply avoid it. A very human reaction and I'm sure denial is healthy in various cases - but I don't always support it no matter what.

Anyway, I can't debate anything serious with someone who can't approach this from a logical standpoint, because our use of language pretty much demands that we stick with something that makes universal sense. Otherwise, we'd just be bickering back and forth, which is not what I'm looking for when having interesting and hopefully enlightening exchanges.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#75

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,415

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 10:56
I believe child killing is wrong, but then I also believe that killing in general is wrong. Does it mean I don't like shooting people and stuff in games ? No, not really.
I understand CU's disgust though.
Games of today get more and more realistic graphics which try to depict human beings as is. Killing humans in general would therefore have to be banned. But instead they don't mind that.
CU's point of view should IMHO be against killing in general, not against just children. CU, why do you think that killing adults in games is OK, but children isn't ?

If you're talking about killing in general then I could agree with you, except that I believe a game is a game and that it doesn't go any further than that. Killing children would be a disgusting act, but I agree with the others that implementing the option to do it and then punishing people severely for doing it would be better than just adding children who just run away and can't even be hit by a stray bullet.

Also, I believe that removing the children would be the best idea and only involving them in certain quests would be a lot better.

Another game is Black & White II had the possibilty of destroying people's homes and throwing kids in the ocean and stuff like that….
Pladio is offline

Pladio

Pladio's Avatar
Guardian of Nonsense
RPGWatch Donor

#76

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, uk
Posts: 3,171
Send a message via MSN to Pladio

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 11:04
Think of it this way - sometimes there are worse ways to hurt someone than to kill them.

On Tatooine on KotOR you meet the widow who has children and is penniless, and has only one trophy of her husband's that she wants to sell off. You can take it, refuse to sell or give her money and leave her to suffer - and her children as well, if they survive.

— Mike
txa1265 is offline

txa1265

txa1265's Avatar
SasqWatch

#77

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Corning, NY USA
Posts: 11,410

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 11:58
CU like I said I don't put much gravitas on fiction, with real social matters it's a different matter to me. However, you continue to bring reality into fiction but it's really out of context. Take War Games for example do you not think they trivialise such a reality? The families of the mentally scared and physically injured from conflict probably think so. People lose sons & daughters to road accidents every year so racing games should be banned as insensitive also? If you bring reality into fiction there is a whole host of hurtful situations to many people because really you need to remove yourself from reality to enjoy fiction. The reality is that in a game nobody is getting hurt, while whatever is going on in the real world they are, and that is a very important difference. Games are just not that important that they'll take away my empathy for the real.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#78

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 15:22
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.

The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt

he who tries to make a point
misses the point
every time
- Ariel Pink
curiously undead is offline

curiously undead

curiously undead's Avatar
tuned to a different freq

#79

Join Date: May 2007
Location: standing under everyone
Posts: 812

Default 

July 11th, 2008, 15:41
Originally Posted by curiously undead View Post
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.
What do you mean by realistic punishment?

You have to think of that in terms of whatever game that would implement these possible actions. In Fallout 3, which again I don't think is suited for child killing, I don't see why the player should be "realistically punished" - assuming you're talking about life in jail or capital punishment. There seems to be no government in place in that post-apoc setting, or perhaps I'm wrong and there's some faction to enforce a world-wide law.

However, I would - as a developer - try to depict what happens when you commit such a horrible crime. Demonstrate the effect it has on the family of the child, and how much damage can come from killing a single human being. To simply punish the player because you condemn the action would be stupid, because that would teach him nothing except to avoid it - but not why.

VERY few games have attempted to tread that territory, and I don't see Fallout 3 as a likely candidate to do any sort of intelligent treatment on such things.

But I still fail to see, which is what YOU'VE avoided all along, why it's ok to kill adults and wreck their families along the way.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#80

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,415
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Fallout 3 - Full Skill List
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:21.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch