Cyberpunk 2077 - Unkillable Children, Story NPCs

Originally Posted by Silver
@Eye
I didn't play Carmeggedon but I know I would of enjoyed it. I was playing Twisted Metal 2 and you could run over civies in that one too - inbetween firing missles at each other.

I miss the mess around games that we used to get. I still remember Black and White and training my lion avatar or whatever to throw my enemies into the sea. Great fun! Discipline was funny too, of course he would sulk for a little while but that just made it more amusing.

People need to play more god games I think.

Twisted Metal 2! I do miss that game.

In regards to killing children in games, I don't particularly care if it's allowed or forbidden. I think I experimented with it once or twice just to see if I could in games like Fallout, then I left it alone for good.

If it's forbidden in Cyberpunk, oh well? That's not why I want to play the game.

If the argument is about choice, my stance would be this: unless it serves any relevance to the story or side quests, then it's irrelevant. You don't need "the option" to kill children if you never had any interest in doing so. Let the teams working on the game put their effort on more important things. Had that article not popped up, nobody would be concerned about the "option" to do so.

Originally Posted by Kos
Purplebob has been trolling against that game and any CDPR game since years now. So your comment about reading comprehension is quite funny.
She has basically criticized everything they have ever done. She goes on this game on as she did with Witcher 3. No Children killing possible? How dare they???
The games she plays like Kingmaker don't allow this kind of stuff at all, but that is ok, very immersive anyway. She nails nothing she just goes on on her bias.

I am Swiss so keep your USA/Christian/bigot shit for yourself but nearly every people blaming immersion regarding kids and that probably includes you are from an Anglo Saxon country.

And that is also my point, focus is essentially on what is allowed to be mentioned in the US. You want cyberpunk in a gritty urban domain? What about sex, nudity, rape, torture etc.. Those elements are way more relevant on a setting with low lifes, gangs, psychotic, underground, night, money and power than kids. Why this point on kids?

Wow … Jesus Christ …

Originally Posted by Ragnaris
If the argument is about choice, my stance would be this: unless it serves any relevance to the story or side quests, then it's irrelevant. You don't need "the option" to kill children if you never had any interest in doing so. Let the teams working on the game put their effort on more important things. Had that article not popped up, nobody would be concerned about the "option" to do so.

But..but..but…what about the immurshion??

In all seriousness though, it's good to see a rational post among all the retardation in this thread.

Originally Posted by Ragnaris
Twisted Metal 2! I do miss that game.

In regards to killing children in games, I don't particularly care if it's allowed or forbidden. I think I experimented with it once or twice just to see if I could in games like Fallout, then I left it alone for good.

If it's forbidden in Cyberpunk, oh well? That's not why I want to play the game.

If the argument is about choice, my stance would be this: unless it serves any relevance to the story or side quests, then it's irrelevant. You don't need "the option" to kill children if you never had any interest in doing so. Let the teams working on the game put their effort on more important things. Had that article not popped up, nobody would be concerned about the "option" to do so.

At the same time it makes these NPCs irrelevant to gameplay. No need to protect them, no need caring if it will be hurt. Takes part of the emotional layer away in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Andrew23
At the same time it makes these NPCs irrelevant to gameplay. No need to protect them, no need caring if it will be hurt. Takes part of the emotional layer away in my opinion.

I think games will always have pointless NPCs anyway. If developers kept only essential NPCs, their worlds would feel very empty. When you walk into a town or city, you want to feel like it's lived in. Additionally, if a settlement existed with only people who had a quest for my character, it wouldn't feel believable to me - there's no way I could accept that everyone in a town or city needs me, a stranger, to go fetch their frying pan or their lost ancient heirloom and trust me within the first minute of meeting them.

If people want the option to kill children, my question would then become: why does it have to be children?

Every NPC you kill actually reduces choice. In the end your only option to complete the game would be to keep on killing.

I'm pretty good at separating games from reality so I don't think I am or was ever bothered by it, but maybe that's because games rarely allow it. I'm fine with knocking people unconscious or just disallowing it by design (like not being able to draw weapons in certain regions).

As somebody mentioned, there are more important things than this to spent time on.

Originally Posted by Ragnaris
Twisted Metal 2! I do miss that game.

In regards to killing children in games, I don't particularly care if it's allowed or forbidden. I think I experimented with it once or twice just to see if I could in games like Fallout, then I left it alone for good.

If it's forbidden in Cyberpunk, oh well? That's not why I want to play the game.

If the argument is about choice, my stance would be this: unless it serves any relevance to the story or side quests, then it's irrelevant. You don't need "the option" to kill children if you never had any interest in doing so. Let the teams working on the game put their effort on more important things. Had that article not popped up, nobody would be concerned about the "option" to do so.

Said it much better, and much shorter, than I could have lol.

In all the years of playing games, which has been decades, I never worried about killing random NPC's or not. Sometimes you can sometimes you can't. I don't pick games based on who I can kill in that regard. I have never missed the option when not there and if it was there I seldom used it - for children or other NPC's - unless there was a quest/story related reason to do so. And then it was more part of the game. Just so many other things that can add to immersion. Nor do I see it as a concern in any way to censorship considering not killing certain NPC's/children have been around for ages already and so far it hasn't led to a censorship Armageddon that I have seen.

I think the only child I ever wanted to off was Babette from Skyrim and she was a vampire so a bit gray. But she wasn't there anyhow when I cleaned out the DB. Nor was it a big deal.

Until "reading" this thread I have thought that the question if children in cRPGs are killable doesn't actually interest anyone. Apparently I was wrong.

Well, to be honest this theme appeared very strikingly in Fallout 2. The fact that there was a precedence in this game and role-playing consequences implemented for those who even accidentally killed a child (thus the child-killer tag) made the arguments in favour of it arguably more resonant when Fallout 3's design didn't include it and even cheekily waved the "immortal children" banner at the player in several quests. Who could forget Little Lamplight?

That there's no similar precedence definitely affects my interest; I'm not concerned in the slightest whether this is incorporated into Cyberpunk 2077 as indeed there are simply far too many other legitimate central themes to be interested in.

WoW, I didn't think this thread will get blown out of all proportions!

No one "rational" will stop buying a game because they can't kill children in them but people who ask for killable children aren't ALWAYS some sick twisted child murders as well. So lets not pass judgement on people…

Most people here who get up on their moral high ground about killing children in game will slaughter an entire city without giving seconds thought so the who thing reeks of huge hypocrisy to me I play MMOs and believe me I have committed genocides in many games by the about of mobs I have killed and i am sure most you have done the same!

Immersion is a subjective matter and its different from people to people. Is that so hard to understand?

Originally Posted by Morrandir
Until "reading" this thread I have thought that the question if children in cRPGs are killable doesn't actually interest anyone. Apparently I was wrong.

As has been said by others, the topic isn't really about killable children, the topic is about killable anybody and that if you make exceptions in any direction then you reduce the gameplay roleplay options available to the player.

These are not children, they are pixels in a computer game that represent stuff, usually stuff in a hyper fantasized environment - I mean, have you forgotten already the demon child in Dragon Age: Origins and how the to-kill-or-not-to-kill actually presented an interesting dilemma.

You should be asking yourself what it is about children that peak your fantasy defences while a whole raft of other potential "awwwwwws" are waiting in the wings, from cute dogs to old people and from women to monks. And not only human versions of all of the above, but monster versions of them all as well.

Like you're projecting a more religious interpretation of innocence onto your game. When I say you I don't necessarily mean you, as your post was quite vague on the topic and I shamelessly haven't read every post in this thread, but you're tone suggests it's somehow crazy to expect people to be interested in having every aspect of their game be manipulatable by gameplay, which is a weird position, especially on a cRPG specific discussion board.. In the current climate it just happens to be children that are the most emotive topic for people.

The complaint is more that there is less gameplay choices, not the morality of specific gameplay choices.

Originally Posted by lackblogger
As has been said by others, the topic isn't really about killable children, the topic is about killable anybody

In a perfect world it would be about revivable/resurrectable nobody.

Originally Posted by lackblogger
As has been said by others, the topic isn't really about killable children, the topic is about killable anybody and that if you make exceptions in any direction then you reduce the gameplay roleplay options available to the player.

These are not children, they are pixels in a computer game that represent stuff, usually stuff in a hyper fantasized environment - I mean, have you forgotten already the demon child in Dragon Age: Origins and how the to-kill-or-not-to-kill actually presented an interesting dilemma.

You should be asking yourself what it is about children that peak your fantasy defences while a whole raft of other potential "awwwwwws" are waiting in the wings, from cute dogs to old people and from women to monks. And not only human versions of all of the above, but monster versions of them all as well.

Like you're projecting a more religious interpretation of innocence onto your game. When I say you I don't necessarily mean you, as your post was quite vague on the topic and I shamelessly haven't read every post in this thread, but you're tone suggests it's somehow crazy to expect people to be interested in having every aspect of their game be manipulatable by gameplay, which is a weird position, especially on a cRPG specific discussion board.. In the current climate it just happens to be children that are the most emotive topic for people.

The complaint is more that there is less gameplay choices, not the morality of specific gameplay choices.

You explained my thoughts and feelings on this matter much better than I ever could with words

Originally Posted by joxer
In a perfect world it would be about revivable/resurrectable nobody.

Haha, is that another one of your ever increasing list of ever repeatable bugbears

Originally Posted by lackblogger
As has been said by others, the topic isn't really about killable children, the topic is about killable anybody and that if you make exceptions in any direction then you reduce the gameplay roleplay options available to the player.

Yes, I've understood that. But to me the existence or nonexistence of these exceptions is such a minor point that I can't understand why it's being discussed to this extent.

But after all we're in a forum for cRPG nerds (like me) to discuss everything about cRPGs so perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised.

Originally Posted by Morrandir
Yes, I've understood that. But to me the existence or nonexistence of these exceptions is such a minor point that I can't understand why it's being discussed to this extent.

But after all we're in a forum for cRPG nerds (like me) to discuss everything about cRPGs so perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised.

Yes, I think the more pertinent question is why people were expecting Cyberpunk2077 to be a game which would likely have the standard which demanded everything be gameplay. My memory of discussions about Witcher 3 were that it was more a cinematic game than a sandbox.

Had they previously hyped the fact that it was going to be so open & this news comes as a let down? Or is this something that's just sprung out of journalism quarters or agenda gangs?

Originally Posted by Morrandir
Yes, I've understood that. But to me the existence or nonexistence of these exceptions is such a minor point that I can't understand why it's being discussed to this extent.

But after all we're in a forum for cRPG nerds (like me) to discuss everything about cRPGs so perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised.

For me its also minor thing and personally I don't really care one way or the other and I bet most people in this thread don't care as well. However, I responded a question which sort of seemed to imply that there is some thing wrong with people who want to killable children in game. I simply pointed out that there could be game play reason(s).

Originally Posted by lackblogger
Yes, I think the more pertinent question is why people were expecting Cyberpunk2077 to be a game which would likely have the standard which demanded everything be gameplay.

What people. Candy Cruash Saga addicts?

I expect from CP2077 to be an art of it's own.
So far it seems it'll fulfil each and every expectation of mine.

Of course, it's too early to be 100% sure and can still happen the final product is DarkSouls clone and then I'll have to refund and never hear about it.

Darn these inconvenient morals that raise their ugly head occasionally.

At this point I'm really not sure if it's a world exercise in self delusion or virtue signaling on a wide scale.

I wish there were immortal children in real life. That would be epic.