Eating Our Friends RG talked about this...

Because those who aren't offended (at least some of them) don't seem to want to recognize that others find it offensive.. and therefore it can't possibly hurt the game to put it in. Or they think it's possible to completely isolate the idea from those who would be offended.

 

I want to write a stage scene about a DRUG CRAZED!!! CANNIBAL ORGY!!! Starring E'li Fox!!!

We will need FULL NUDITY!!! cannibal emotes!!! PELVIC THRUSTS!!! Lots of RED SYRUP!!!

Let us Role Play on stage!!!

Here's a novel Idea-- Let us role play in the game!!!

 

I thought gore is already in, just not the eating people part?

 

I dunno, seems like a bunch of very uptight individuals that would like to dictate the morals of the game to everyone, personally.

But honestly I don't really care if it goes in or not.

I think it's crazy to be worried about canibalism and if your kids will be influenced by it in a game where female elbows can't even be rendered realistically yet

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0046/0046_01.ASP

 

I learned how to properly DM by reading that comic.

Eat it, 700 Club!!

 

Where do we draw the line at what people find "offensive", this is very subjective...

Is two male or two female avatar's kissing offensive? I'm sure to some it will be, should we make sure it's blocked from the game as well?

Eating pork in the game may be "offensive" to some, should we ban sweet sweet bacon!

I will take my own advise, we all know my position on this topic so I will bow out so other voices can be heard.

Cheers

Yes I believe this is possible...

 

Hmmm.. Rild vs. Bowen...

I think that what we've got here is the classic...

Portland, OR vs. Seattle, WA debate.

These two are known rivals, so I suggest that the mods lock this one down before it gets fiery:

 

I learned to DM by planing planing and more planing--Only to have the group set fire to the shop before we got started.

Player, "Can I buy a torch?"

Shop keeper, "why yes sonny, only the best in stock".

The rest is HISTORY!!!

They had fun!!! I never planed again!!!

 

@Retro Why do you think I was asking what the idea brings to gameplay? While lines have to be drawn somewhere there can be no clear winner in a debate on "morals". I'm content enough so long as people realize that other players can be offended. Though it never stops anyone from pushing an idea.

Many months ago we had a guy in here asking that SotA have sex in-game complete with full frontal and animations. If I recall right, freedom, immersion and RP were at the top of the list of reasons to put it in. So where DO we draw the line?

Any real meaningful debate at this point would be.. well what DOES all this cannibalism and body parts for this or that bring to the game? How do you ensure isolating the features from those who don't want to be part of it?

 

We don't know what can happen inside any siege castle that is for PvP. "All the food could spoil and offer nothing".
We don't, "Know" anything about our game until it's in our hands for a very long time because of "Discovery".
"Impressing any restrictions upon our creator is a bad thing to do"!
When Ultima Online came out, such things as Killing of other players freely was thought to be a hideous idea as were many other features of the game such as cutting up your victim's body.
~Time Lord~

 

People keep bringing up UO like it was such a great thing. Yet turning people into jerky was removed for a reason and there was so much grief over people not wanting to get randomly PKed that someone felt it was necessary to make it consensual (ie Trammel anyone?). People forget that their actions are also part of other people's experiences in-game and that isn't always a good thing for the other player. So apparently.. the freely able to kill other players is still considered a hideous idea. Or else PvP wouldn't need to be consensual.

Also there's something to be said for common sense. This is an online game.. an entire group's food isn't going to just spoil any more than a siege is going to last longer than most people have time to play. Call it an educated guess from over 30 years of gaming experience.

 

Call it what you will as I am only defending that position which began the gaming industry Lord British Richard Flying through space and time with a rocket attached under his royal behind Garriott !
~Time Lord~

 

"For the Arts"
~Time Lord~

 

uh.. no.. you're using RG as an excuse to promote an idea you like. I may be a huge RG fan but I'm no fan boy. Because RG said so doesn't automagically make the idea a good one. For the record I agree with RG on a lot of his design philosophy and ideas. This just happens to be one of the few I don't.

 

I think people are going to have to thicken their skin a little

Acrylics Top 10 SotA Banned Foods:

1. Peanuts "OMG! real life kids may die!"
2. Wheat "I'm glutton intolerant"
3. Pork "I'm Jewish"
4. Vegetables "Like eeeww"
5. Alcohol "I'm an alcoholic"
6. Dairy "I'm a better vegan than you"
7. Pudding "It reminds me of Bill Cosby"
8. Pie "Duh! Cake"
9. Fish Steaks "UO Copyrights"
0. Candy "Tooth Decay"

 

I support in game body-part pie, and depictions of blood/carnage. In a video game it is no big deal.

In this game WE literally slaughter and butcher and cleave, carve, slice, slash, stab, skin, pierce, bludgeon, incinerate, freeze and desanguinate hordes of critters from the land AND we know it needs to be represented by graphic depictions of blood/carnage.

Would you rather felled adversaries sprout sunflowers and rainbows?

I think we should be seeing how many doors we can open in this game, not how many we can close...

May the clouds rain blood in New Britannia!

 

"Opening doors" for the sake of it is not a good reason to do so. You may not like what you find on the other side.

You can use the excuse of wanting to be ground breaking.. pushing the limits or what have you to justify making an argument for literally anything and yet there seems to be no consideration at all for the consequences. No matter how you dress it up though the argument boils down to "I want".. and then when someone comes out with "I don't want" well.. both sides dress it up with whatever justifications work for them.. you chase each others tails in circles and no one gets anywhere.

So what doors shall we justify opening for the hell of it in trying to be ground breaking? We had that XXX "adult" suggestion from a few months back.. should we open THAT door and see how well it does for SotA? (rhetorical question). Quite a number of people seemed to think that would be a pretty bad idea.

What people need to realize is that "I don't want" is just as valid of an argument as "I want". Yet the former is often dismissed by the latter.

If you really want to get down to it.. you need to win the debate in the realm of ideas. Poke holes in suggestions and see if someone can figure out how to plug them up. Actually figure out the details before you tout what a great idea it is. Acknowledge and identify the problems and figure out how to fix them. If you like the idea so much you should be able to work constructively towards that end. If you're unable or unwilling to go that far for an idea you supposedly really like.. then why should the devs?

Then you need to be willing to take on the criticism and defend what you've come up with and be open to making adjustments.

This is all normally what I DON'T see much of in threads. I'm not talking specifically about this thread but if you really want to prove an idea worth while.. you need more than "I want" justifications.

At this point I'm just waiting to see what specifics people come up with so I can poke holes and point out problems.

 

What's worse? Knowing cannibals are in the world or stopping by the bank and seeing 50 "Legolas" sitting around AFK!

Not everyone wants to be a band of Merry Men. Players need choices.

I'm not sure what the obsession with XXX is or what it has to do with this? Necrophiliacs?

 

"Warning, May Contain Nudity Painted by Michel Angelo"

~Time Lord~