Announcements

Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2

Please read the current update for instructions on downloading the latest update. Players with Mac versions of the game will not be affected, but you will have a slightly longer wait for your version of the new maps. Please make a copy of your character folder before running the new update, just to make sure you don't lose any of your custom work.

It looks like we can give everyone a list of minimum specs for running City of Titans. Please keep in mind that this is 'for now' until we are able to add more graphics and other system refinements. Currently you will need :
Windows 10 or later required; no Intel integrated graphics like UHD, must have AMD or NVIDIA card or discrete chipset with 4Gb or more of VRAM
At least 16GB of main DRAM.
These stats may change as we continue to test.

To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.

Multiple ESRB ratings (adult content area)

193 posts / 0 new
Last post
Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Multiple ESRB ratings (adult content area)

Hello,

One thing that I always found limiting in COX was the teen rating. Especially for villains side, I think it almost made it a silly concept, because there was a huge range of things you couldn't do because of the rating.

I certainly wouldn't support not having a teen rating for this new game for demographic appeal, but then why not have a higher rated zone or area somewhere in the game that you could go for some more realism? In fact, in COT, couldn't you have the whole "villains" side be ESRB Mature or Adults Only?

That is, if we are even limited by ESRB in the first place, since this will be online only, I think it has been said they won't bother with retail.

Because really, what is the value in having a teen rated villain side?

Yes, I know some of the problems would be having to do age verification, probably a disclaimer in-game, some difficulties if you actually want to have some mixed content such as PVP zones.

But, by the same token you have to deal with making sure none or your missions or activities on villains side violate the teen rating. And I am not saying I want to have serious crimes like rape in-game, but you could certainly have blood, gore, language, nudity, adult themes, drug use, greater violence, and so on. I think it would make the villains side able to really feel like you were playing a villain, not an episode of Sesame Street.

Think more along the lines of Watchmen, or even Game of Thrones.

Note that all the original Unreal and Unreal Tournament games were rated Mature (17+). I really loved those games and it was partially because they were not watered down for a younger audience. Since COT will be using the Unreal engine, this would be a chance to "channel it's roots". (I really want "capture the flag" in PvP, but I will save that for another post). Think of all the fun that you can have playing all the various FPS games like Unreal Tournament and Crysis, etc.

Please don't think I am not sensitive to the ratings issue, I have two children myself (2 and 4), so I appreciate the issue of adult content "bleeding" over (sorry, couldn't resist) or causing other issues. I think rather than look at this as a problem, it could be a learning opportunity, such as when your children come of age and such.

-Bodai

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
This idea of a "mature"

This idea of a "mature" version/zone of the game was debated at least several times back on the CoH forums. While I would technically be in favor of such a thing in abstract it really boils down to how the Devs would have to handle the extra responsibility it would take to contain it.

It's not just worrying about things like the Unreal engine handling extra game violence. They'd have to worry about "compartmentalizing" many different aspects of the game like global chat and even things like "adult" oriented costumes/visuals because as we all know ERP was pretty widespread (albeit mostly underground) even in Teen-rated CoH. If you allowed a zone to be Rated Mature by design then people will probably nickname that zone "Second Life" for the implied naughtiness and debauchery that would go on there.

Again I would probably personally enjoy a Mature Rated Superhero game of some form or fashion. But even though you've accounted for some of the problems I sadly believe the Devs of this game would ultimately consider it far more trouble than it'd be worth.

P.S. Another thing you may not be aware of is that the MWM folks have already mentioned they want to try to break away from the paradigm of zones being labeled strictly "hero only" or "villain only" like they were in CoH. Apparently most (if not all) zones will allow heroes and villains to co-exist in some fashion. This means there might not really be any particularly appropriate zones to cordon off as the "Mature" zone as you suggest.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
I can think of a very good

I can think of a very good reason not to do that right off the top of my head.

It fractures the community.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

I can think of a very good reason not to do that right off the top of my head.
It fractures the community.

Yeah there's this point too. You'd likely have people who'd only go to the Mature zone (or vice versa) creating a permanent divide across the entire playerbase. From that point of view it'd be better if the entire game was Mature-rated... but of course we know that's even less likely to happen.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Ellysyn
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 month ago
Joined: 10/03/2013 - 15:45
Lothic wrote:

If a mature zone was created i'm pretty sure it would automatically give the game as a whole a M rating. You can't have a T rated game but have a specifically designed mature section. It's like a disney game rated E but if you enter a code in that was specifically designed to unlock blood and gore. Then the game wouldn't be E at all since that stuff knowingly exists in the game. Whose to say only +18 would be in it. And the Devs I believe have already said its going to be a T rated game. Personally, I don't really care what rating the game has. I'm still gonna play the hell out of it. But, also just cause it uses the unreal engine. Doesn't mean it has to have blood and gore. There's plenty of other unreal engine games that already have that. This game doesn't need that stuff. It can do great without having to use blood and gore. Not all games need blood and gore.

----------------------------------------
Owner and Big Sister of the Justice Girls -Champions Online-City of Titans-
Forum Breaker
Leader of the Ellysyn Dark Ensemble

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Well, I knew that it would be

Well, I knew that it would be easy to come up with reasons why this could not or should not be done.

When City of Villains was first released, it was actually a separate game. Even when they started combining them, there were various restrictions on even chatting with a "villain". So the "fracturing" of the community was in there by design. I think it makes it a bit more interesting if you have a bit of "us" and "them" going on.

The point would not be to do it just for an excuse to display various forms of vulgarity. For instance, there are comedians who are profane and it is not very funny because they use it like a crutch, or for shock value (like maybe Howard Stern?), but then in the hands of geniuses like Robin Williams, it is used as a tool to be really funny.

There are already controls built in to fix some of the problems pointed out. There is a profanity filter. If you had villains coming over to heroes side, you could have a tab in the costume creator so that a less naughty version of your toon was seen, etc.

Places like Las Vegas exist for a reason, it's an escape, just like a game is an escape. And I for one would rather be playing a mission that could convey real fear and other emotions rather than playing like an episode of scooby-doo.

-Bodai

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

When City of Villains was first released, it was actually a separate game. Even when they started combining them, there were various restrictions on even chatting with a "villain". So the "fracturing" of the community was in there by design. I think it makes it a bit more interesting if you have a bit of "us" and "them" going on.

Yes when City of Villains first launched it was technically presented as a separate standalone game. But the Devs always intended to merge it into City of Heroes and have it all become one unified game. If you recall at the time they did their best to try to call it an "expansion-alone" game to stress the idea it was more of a huge expansion to City of Heroes. And once Issue 6 of City of Heroes launched both "games" were actually incorporated into the same software client. It didn't actually matter whether you had an account for CoH, CoV or both you because regardless of that you had all of the code for both already loaded on your machine. They were always meant to be one big game in the long run.

It even appears that the Devs of CoT want to "accelerate" the process of merging the hero and villain factions of this game by going so far as to allow them to co-exist in the same zones from the very beginning.

Bodai wrote:

The point would not be to do it just for an excuse to display various forms of vulgarity. For instance, there are comedians who are profane and it is not very funny because they use it like a crutch, or for shock value (like maybe Howard Stern?), but then in the hands of geniuses like Robin Williams, it is used as a tool to be really funny.
[...]
Places like Las Vegas exist for a reason, it's an escape, just like a game is an escape. And I for one would rather be playing a mission that could convey real fear and other emotions rather than playing like an episode of scooby-doo.

On these points I could agree. It would be cool if some of the villain content of the new game could be amped up to be more dark and adult-oriented. Obviously a Teen-rating limits how far they can go with the violence and sinister aspects of missions and/or visuals in the game.

But I would argue that some of that could be improved simply with some better writing and planning without having to push beyond the bounds of what a Teen-rating would allow. There are plenty of elements of a virtual "Las Vegas" as you put it that can be presented/suggested in a Teen-rated venue without having to go all the way into snuff-film territory. To use your comedian analogy there are some who can allude to all sorts of "blue material" which adults would appreciate without having to actually blurt out any kinds of obvious profanity. Being able to pull that off in a MMO setting is difficult, but it isn't impossible.

Maybe the folks at MWM will be more willing to push the boundaries because they aren't constrained by a huge corporate organization the way Paragon Studios was.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Maybe the folks at MWM will be more willing to push the boundaries because they aren't constrained by a huge corporate organization the way Paragon Studios was.

City of Heroes (EU release): 12+ PEGI Rating
City of Villains (EU Release): 16+ PEGI Rating

When they merged the two games together: 16+ PEGI Rating...

I believe that his only happened because City of Villains actually was released as a standalone game, and you never needed to own City of Heroes to play it. Sure it *added* stuff to City of Heroes, but it was an optional purchase. As soon as they merged both of them, City of Heroes *automatically* became 16+.

Or at least, that is how my interpretation of it worked over here in the UK. I could well be wrong, but the PEGI rating of CoH didn't go up until they decided to merge the two games into a single purchase.

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Well, so far, it seems to me

Well, so far, it seems to me that people like the idea *IF* there is a way to do it that sufficiently offsets the downsides.

As an aside, I don't even like the concept of black/white good/evil, I think everything is shades of gray. Even COX actually had 4, when you include the vigilante and rogue. I always play neutral or evil characters if I can in any game I play, to keep my options open.

-Bodai

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
To be honest, in a City of

To be honest, in a City of Titans sense there's really no good reason to have a Vigilante AND a Rogue alignment ... especially if it's all just One Big World that the Heroes and Villains are playing in. The entire reason why you needed to have a Vigilante/Rogue divide AT ALL was so that you'd have some sort of attribution to one side or the other for the purposes of things that simply COULDN'T be split down the middle (like, say, Ouroboros). But in a completely new game where you don't have that Legacy REQUIREMENT that PCs be One Side Or The Other like City of Heroes was built to mandate (or else things became horribly, horribly broken), it's probably best to just merge Vigilante/Rogue into a single "alignment" (as it were) so that character alignments work on a linear scale, rather than on a "wheel" formation like City of Heroes did.

In fact, I'd even go so far as to say it might be prudent to put the Alignment System of City of Titans onto a "Three Tens" kind of linear scale ... where 1-10 is Villain, 11-15 is Rogue, 16-20 is Vigilante, and 21-30 is Hero. Rogue and Vigilante are two halves of the "neutral" category in between Hero and Villain, and merely describe which side they "lean" towards, rather than being a "full" alignment in and of themselves like City of Heroes had. Using a 10 scale like that then makes movement of your Alignment something which takes some "effort" to do, so that transitions up and down the scale aren't "quick" or otherwise "instant" and give the Content Creators leeway to work with changes that are gradual, yet still measurable, which you wouldn't necessarily get with a smaller scale on the continuum (of 4s instead of 10s, for example).


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Hube2
Hube2's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 month ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 15:12
In the Kickstarter update #18

In the Kickstarter update #18 http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/missingworldsmedia/the-phoenix-project-city-of-titans/posts/630570?ref=activity they started explaining the alignment system. Looks like a many shades of gray kinda think to me.

Cinnder
Cinnder's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Gunterkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/26/2013 - 16:24
While I like the idea of more

While I like the idea of more mature content, I don't want it enough to ask the devs to spend a lot of resources on it if it will cause the kind of difficulties people are mentioning above. I think there is more room inside the teen rating to explore villainous activities than CoV ever touched on. For example, despite all its faults, SWTOR did manage on occasion to make my redside characters feel more evil than my CoV characters ever did, and I believe that game still has a teen rating. Here's hoping that, at the very least, CoT will let us reach that edge.

Spurn all ye kindle.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
The number one problem that

The number one problem that City of Villains had with respect to making Villains actually FEEL Villainous was the fact that they were basically working within an "Heroic" model for how the Missions and Story Arcs and so on were supposed to work. It wasn't until they BROKE THE MOLD with the Mayhem Missions that Villains actually started doing things that were Villainous for the sake of Villainy though, were you could perpetrate Dastardly Deeds upon Paragon City(!) involving lots and lots and lots of PROPERTY DAMAGE!!!

Most of the time though, Villains just felt like "reskinned" Heroes, mainly because of how the missions were written, and the fact that no matter what you "Did" there were no real effects. Newspaper missions all happened in a vacuum that didn't have any lingering effects on them (such as moving your Reputation with various Groups, for example). Kinda hard to believe that you're building some kind of "Don't Mess With Me" reputation when no matter what you do It Just Doesn't Matter To The World.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
I have to disagree with Bodai

I have to disagree with Bodai about ramping things up. This game, just like its predecessor, reflects a mainstream comics world (like DC and Marvel). There is no place for blood and gore here. It was bad enough in CoH with people using all kinds of profane language and ERP'ing all over the place (not just in the "Sparkly Vampire" section of Pocket D).

I can certainly understand having things be a bit grittier in certain sections of the world map, but certain things do *not* belong in a game like CoH or CoT. Things need to be family-friendly here as they were in CoH, which provided a great opportunity for family quality time.

CoT should *not* reflect the real-world level of violence which we see and hear about every second of every day in the media. This game, in particular, should afford the players an escape from that insanity!

Mendicant
Mendicant's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/26/2013 - 11:27
Amerikatt wrote:
Amerikatt wrote:

CoT should *not* reflect the real-world level of violence which we see and hear about every second of every day in the media. This game, in particular, should afford the players an escape from that insanity!

To quote the estimable Squirrel Girl, "Maybe it's just me, but I'm not crazy about super hero stories where everything's all dark and moody. Personally, I like the ones where good guys fight giant apes on the moon and stuff. Remember those? I do. That was back when comic book worlds were places you wanted to escape to... not from."

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
Mendicant wrote:
Mendicant wrote:

Amerikatt wrote:
CoT should *not* reflect the real-world level of violence which we see and hear about every second of every day in the media. This game, in particular, should afford the players an escape from that insanity!

To quote the estimable Squirrel Girl, "Maybe it's just me, but I'm not crazy about super hero stories where everything's all dark and moody. Personally, I like the ones where good guys fight giant apes on the moon and stuff. Remember those? I do. That was back when comic book worlds were places you wanted to escape to... not from."

Exactly, Mendicant! The Silver Age was really a magical time, filled with really silly stuff ... like super-kittens! :P

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Well, each to his own I guess

Well, each to his own I guess.

For me, pretty much every story I have ever liked was defined by how bad the bad guys were and how difficult it was to defeat them. Victory was never assured (in fact usually seemed unlikely) and the bad guys even won some of the time, or the protagonists win but at a high cost. I grew up on cyberpunk (Bladerunner, Ghost in the Shell), sci-fi horror (Aliens), action movies (dirty harry, lethal weapon, die hard), and such. I never really read comic books, and the few times I did the one's I wanted were behind the counter that you had to ask for due to mature content.

I agree that these things can and have been accomplished within the bounds of "family rated" material, but I think it is much harder to do and thus more rare. I think the best "comic" themed example that comes to mind might be "The Incredibles", but I would say it did so partially by pushing it's PG rating.

I am having trouble thinking of any COV material that accomplished this, I think that would be one of the reasons I would take extended breaks fairly often. I would say that this is a contributor to why one of the bigger complaints about COX was the monotony of many of the missions. People favored trials and task forces where the risks and stakes were bigger, if only slightly.

What kept me playing was probably completely different things, such as hanging with friends, gathering badges, or competition type things like see if you can build a team that can do X, and so on.

Do you not think it is a little selfish to say that this type of material does *not* belong in a game like COH? You find it objectionable, it does not fit your vision of what it should be, therefore there is no place for it? Virtual worlds are basically limitless in size and I think there is room to accommodate all kinds of tastes. And no-one would be forced to go anywhere they don't want to.

-Bodai

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

Lothic wrote:
Maybe the folks at MWM will be more willing to push the boundaries because they aren't constrained by a huge corporate organization the way Paragon Studios was.

City of Heroes (EU release): 12+ PEGI Rating
City of Villains (EU Release): 16+ PEGI Rating
When they merged the two games together: 16+ PEGI Rating...
I believe that his only happened because City of Villains actually was released as a standalone game, and you never needed to own City of Heroes to play it. Sure it *added* stuff to City of Heroes, but it was an optional purchase. As soon as they merged both of them, City of Heroes *automatically* became 16+.
Or at least, that is how my interpretation of it worked over here in the UK. I could well be wrong, but the PEGI rating of CoH didn't go up until they decided to merge the two games into a single purchase.

Again I understand that CoV was technically "released" as a standalone game and that you did not need to have an active CoH account to play it when it first launched.

But the moment you loaded either CoV (standalone from disc) or the Issue 6 patch of CoH on your computer you had the ENTIRE game there. When I mean the ENTIRE game I mean both CoH and CoV combined. There was never a time when there was ever a seperate CoH client and CoV client. CoV might have appeared like a standalone game from a player account point of view, but it heavily relied on all the code established by CoH because they were in fact really only one game as far as the software was concerned.

Basically the way CoV was released to us was a clever marketing strategy to get people to "rebuy" yet another retail game before they merged everyone's accounts and gave everyone access to both sides. The plan from Day One was to have the two games merged - it wasn't something they only thought of doing after CoV launched. Thus the term "expand-alone".

Obviously the folks in charge of giving games PEGI ratings in the UK were unaware of the overall relationship between CoH and CoV. Had they known what was going on "under the hood" so to speak they would have given CoH a 16+ PEGI rating the day CoV went live because they were always destined to exist as a single united game.

This is why I stopped using the acronym "CoX" many years ago. It may be hard to accept but there was never two games there in the minds of the Devs - it was only CoH from the beginning and there was only ever going to be CoH in the end.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
You can have your candy-land

You can have your candy-land filled with super-kittens, just don't take away my red light district or demilitarized zone.

Bambie meets godzilla
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXCUBVS4kfQ

Bring me the head of charlie brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A15v4tTab0Y

-Bodai

Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
Honestly, I don't see it as

Honestly, I don't see it as being selfish. One of the great things about City of Heroes was that a grand/parent could have a child with them while they were playing the game. In fact, Mercedes Lackey (author and CoH player) noted in an interview that she and her husband were able to play CoH with her father-in-law across the country (who was taking care of his ailing wife and had to be very close to her at all times). CoH was a family-friendly game, and I imagine that that is what the CoT developers are trying to keep as part of their design.

That said, it would be entirely inappropriate for graphic violence, blood, gore, nudity, and excessively profane language to be in this game, much as it was not in CoH.

I can see trying to capture the gritty realism of a place like Gotham City's back alleyways, but not using someone's head as a pinata.

There is an entire industry set-up for games like EVE Online and Grand Theft Auto. Let them pander to the baser instincts of humanity and let City of Heroes and City of Titans cater to the purer instincts.

While I understand that this is no longer the 1950's or 1960's, and the Silver Age has given way to the Rust Age, I think that it would be a big turn-off to a lot of people to wait anxiously anticipating the launch of City of Titans only to have it be a holo-brothel version of "Grand Theft Auto: Las Vegas".

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

Do you not think it is a little selfish to say that this type of material does *not* belong in a game like COH? You find it objectionable, it does not fit your vision of what it should be, therefore there is no place for it? Virtual worlds are basically limitless in size and I think there is room to accommodate all kinds of tastes. And no-one would be forced to go anywhere they don't want to.

Bodai wrote:

You can have your candy-land filled with super-kittens, just don't take away my red light district or demilitarized zone.

Even though PvP in CoH was limited to its own specific areas it was still a matter of constant debate on the CoH forums. It would seem even if you kept the "mature" stuff to its own segregated areas of the game you'd still have constant quibbling over its purpose and/or legitimacy.

As others have mentioned it does appear that the Devs of CoT have a more "shades of grey" mindset so perhaps we may get more mature themes and situations than what you described as "Scooby-Doo" level villainy. I still feel that with good writing and planning there's a lot you can do and explore storywise and still maintain an overall Teen Rated environment. This'll probably have to be the compromise we'll have to accept with this.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Terlin
Terlin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/06/2012 - 05:00
We will most likely hold to

We will most likely hold to the teen rating. I can see two primary reasons for this: we want the community to be inclusive of everyone, including villains; and we want to keep the game open for families to play. I've seen many stories of parents finding new connections with their children by playing this type of game. In my opinion, building that same amazing community spirit is vital for CoT.

Now that does not mean villains can't be villainous. Our alignment system allows a lot of variation by measuring your character's Law-Abiding, Violent, and Honorable attributes. Also, we will be looking at ways to empower villains instead of just running them through the same content as heroes. I can't say exactly how we'll do that, but we want villains to be able to act like it.

Its one of the challenges implementing the three-pronged alignment system places on us: so many many shades of gray.

-

Terlin

The Bullpen

Mendicant
Mendicant's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/26/2013 - 11:27
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

You can have your candy-land filled with super-kittens, just don't take away my red light district or demilitarized zone.
Bambie meets godzillahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXCUBVS4kfQ
Bring me the head of charlie brownhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A15v4tTab0Y
-Bodai

I like both, myself. What I try to avoid are the Angst McGrimDark plots where things are dark and gritty not because it makes sense for the plot, but just because, particularly when it goes against previously established information. As an example, I love Appleseed, but I'd despise an Appleseed story where Briareos became a sadistic serial killer that Deunan had to hunt down and kill just because the writer wanted 'a darker feel'. It'd violate his established character.

Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 4 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
Plenty of villainy to go

Plenty of villainy to go around without explicit gore or sex.

Sometimes I think the gore or sex in some "horror" stuff is there to cover the shallow plot or lousy characterizations, kind of like how some food vendors load up a dish with salt to cover the fact that it's not very good.

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Amerikatt wrote:
Amerikatt wrote:

One of the great things about City of Heroes was that a grand/parent could have a child with them while they were playing the game.

If the CoH Forums still existed, I'd be linking RIGHT NOW to the stories of Sister Flame related by her dad to the Community At Large. How this father had his eldest daughter start playing City of Heroes with him, and how playing the game helped her learn to read and type at well above her age level. And then, later on, Sister Flame's younger sister started playing too, and the three of them would play as a family.

To give you an idea of Sister Flame's age when she started playing, she called Clockworks "clicky-clacks" and when she watched her dad play his hero her basic instinct was to help people in trouble she saw on the street. The story of That Little Girl (who was nearly a teenager when CoH "died" at the hands of NC$oft) was just such an inspiration. City of Titans shouldn't be doing anything that makes parents "think twice" about letting their children play the game right along with them (and the rest of the Community).

Why?

Because we're Heroes. This is what we do.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Mendicant
Mendicant's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/26/2013 - 11:27
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

Amerikatt wrote:
One of the great things about City of Heroes was that a grand/parent could have a child with them while they were playing the game.
If the CoH Forums still existed, I'd be linking RIGHT NOW to the stories of Sister Flame related by her dad to the Community At Large. How this father had his eldest daughter start playing City of Heroes with him, and how playing the game helped her learn to read and type at well above her age level. And then, later on, Sister Flame's younger sister started playing too, and the three of them would play as a family.
To give you an idea of Sister Flame's age when she started playing, she called Clockworks "clicky-clacks" and when she watched her dad play his hero her basic instinct was to help people in trouble she saw on the street. The story of That Little Girl (who was nearly a teenager when CoH "died" at the hands of NC$oft) was just such an inspiration. City of Titans shouldn't be doing anything that makes parents "think twice" about letting their children play the game right along with them (and the rest of the Community).
Why?
Because we're Heroes. This is what we do.

Very much this.

I still remember the time that I was running missions with a PUG when we had a new character (both new to the PUG and to CoH, level 3 when he joined us) join the team. He clearly was still learning how to play the game and often would stop in the middle of a fight to comment on some particularly neat power or make a statement as his hero.. We spent the next few hours running missions, explaining how things worked, and engaging in heroic banter. When he finally said he had to log off because it was his bedtime, his father took over the character for a few minutes to thank us all for making his 7-year old son's first experience with CoH a positive one.

Good memories.

Cinnder
Cinnder's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Gunterkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/26/2013 - 16:24
I think the dev inclination

I think the dev inclination on this indicated by Terlin's response above is probably the most pragmatic from a s/w developer's viewpoint, so I'm not arguing the main point of this. However, allow me to point out that the lovely and heart-warming stories of family play mentioned above -- and they are indeed lovely and heart-warming -- are red herrings as regards Bodai's original point. The suggestion of having more mature areas with some sort of age-verification-based access in no way affects the ability of the game to support that kind of wonderful family interaction. Any player that was not interested could simply not go there.

Spurn all ye kindle.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Cinnder wrote:
Cinnder wrote:

The suggestion of having more mature areas with some sort of age-verification-based access in no way affects the ability of the game to support that kind of wonderful family interaction. Any player that was not interested could simply not go there.

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`

Doing that Fractures The Community by balkanizing it. Furthermore, the ... (*ahem*) ... "content" ... (*cough*) ... of the more mature areas simply would not remain CONFINED to those areas, because it would "leak out" into other parts of the game. It's simply UNpossible to completely compartmentalize that kind of content so as to NOT have it "leak" out of its defined areas.

Or to put it another way, if you have a zone dedicated to Chuck Norris Jokes, do you REALLY think the Chuck Norris Jokers will ONLY tell their jokes while they're inside the Chuck Norris Joke Zone? Really? And if they DON'T ... what are you gonna do about it? Huh? Huh? Huh-huh? What's going to happen when the "trollers" take their Witty Banter on the road and start doing it in other zones too?

What you're overlooking is the FACT that Mature Content is a SOCIAL ASPECT of the game, and you can't exactly "wall off" the SOCIAL portions of a Community all that successfully without risking REAL HARM to the HEALTH of that Community overall. This isn't something you can conveniently "put in a box" and keep it inside of that box and never have it get out. Thinking that you CAN do that says a great deal more about the people making such an assertion than it does about the reality that would result from making such a move.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Cinnder
Cinnder's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Gunterkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/26/2013 - 16:24
Sorry, didn't mean to push

I sincerely apologise if I said something so offensive that it warranted that level of dismissiveness in reply. You have so many other logical and informative posts on this forum that I'm honestly surprised to see such an ASCII-graphical response.

I'm concerned that you seem to be conflating chat with game content. The social aspects you describe are independent of game content. Chuck Norris jokers could spout their jokes regardless of whether there were a Chuck Norris joke zone.

What Bodai was advocating was an area where the game content itself could be more mature. Content <> chat. Content is restricted to the area in which is it realised. E.g. you could not have Mothership raids in AP. There was nothing to stop people chatting about mothership raids outside of RWZ, but there was also nothing to stop them from talking about any other mature topic (aside from the profanity filter.)

I'm not arguing the point of whether we should have such an area: I think it causes too many difficulties for the devs, including your point about fracturing the community (though this is only because it cordons some folks off in a small area). Besides, we already have redname response on this. All I'm doing is pointing out fallacious logic and asking folks to keep their arguments relevant, because I dislike when people use emotional tangents to derail a discussion.

Spurn all ye kindle.

Terlin
Terlin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/06/2012 - 05:00
Well, as a writer for the

Well, as a writer for the project, I have been told 'point-blank' to stick to the teen-rating, and we have a lengthy guidebook on what that means. That does not mean we will never change our minds, but for the moment we are locked into ESRB-T.

Also, as someone who has spent way too much time with lawyers and defending products from liability lawsuits, you can't knowingly include a feature without being held responsible for it. Its one type of problem if individuals are engaged in 'mature' behavior, but allowing or encouraging it, even in a limited way, raises the level of accountability for the company.

In our case, that's true in both a legal sense and to the community. There is already plenty of controversy over it without bringing that inside the game.

-

Terlin

The Bullpen

AmbiDreamer
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 5 days ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/07/2013 - 22:49
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

And no-one would be forced to go anywhere they don't want to.
-Bodai

The problem with that seems to be that ratings aren't included to make sure children aren't forced to go into a mature area in a game; the problem is that they'll go there voluntarily if they can. It'd be like making requiring ID optional for the customer at the local bar.

Aside from Terlin's comment above, if simply walling off objectionable content was enough to alter the rating, we never would have experienced the joys of the hot coffee mod in Grand Theft Auto San Andreas.

Longtime City of Heroes player, longtime writer. :) Working in Nebraska.
COT: Mission tips writer, studying Cinema 4D animation program

Darth Fez
Darth Fez's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/20/2013 - 07:53
Some problems I see with this

Some problems I see with this kind of approach are:

1. Are there any examples where gating systems such as age verification have worked? Are there any gating system strong enough to keep out those who shouldn't experience this content even when people start talking about how it is awesome and they wished the whole game were like that? If not, the entire premise is dead in the water.
2. Is the expectation that a 'mature zone' will be fire and forget or is the expectation that, in addition to providing additional PvE and PvP content for the rest of the game, they would have to provide new 'mature' content?
3. Good luck trying to keep the mission architect out of this debate.

We live in a society in which many people are all too eager to blame the misbehaving of their 13-year old grandson on his having played GTA 5. People don't care what rating the developer, the ESRB, or anyone else has slapped on teh game. They care about what their children see. Doubly so if the game they bought is ostensibly rated suitable for ages 13+. So, unless someone has a watertight answer to #1, I don't see how this is at all a feasible idea.

- - - - -
Hail Beard!

Support trap clowns for CoT!

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
... hence the Facepalm ASCII

... hence the Facepalm ASCII ...


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Amerikatt
Amerikatt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/27/2013 - 08:54
One of the best examples of

One of the best examples of comic book villainy I remember is when Lex Luthor enticed a waitress to leave her husband, supposedly to run away with him.

Naturally, right after she hung up the phone, having told her husband she was leaving him, she turned around and Lex's limo was gone!

No graphic sex or violence nor any coarse language, but villainy at its finest. Good, psychological drama.

While I can certainly see a somewhat sanitized version of a red light district being in *some* sort of game, I don't believe that CoT, as a spiritual successor to CoH, would be the right place for that sort of thing. Perhaps in a single-player game or a future generation MMO not produced by MWM.

I remember "Batman: Year One", where Bruce was prowling a red-light district, but that was in a comic book and there was nothing particularly graphic in that. However, I still have to defend CoT/CoH as having to be family-friendly, even if a larger percentage of the demographic would lean more toward grown-ups.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Amerikatt wrote:
Amerikatt wrote:

even if a larger percentage of the demographic would lean more toward grown-ups.

Tom Baker as The Doctor: "What's the point of being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes?"

Me: "Or in my case, all the time ..."


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Lin Chiao Feng
Lin Chiao Feng's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 4 hours ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/02/2013 - 09:27
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

Amerikatt wrote:
even if a larger percentage of the demographic would lean more toward grown-ups.
Tom Baker as The Doctor: "What's the point of being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes?"
Me: "Or in my case, all the time ..."

Me: "I can't take you anywhere." >_<

Has anyone seen my mind? It was right here...

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

Amerikatt wrote:
One of the great things about City of Heroes was that a grand/parent could have a child with them while they were playing the game.
If the CoH Forums still existed, I'd be linking RIGHT NOW to the stories of Sister Flame related by her dad to the Community At Large. How this father had his eldest daughter start playing City of Heroes with him, and how playing the game helped her learn to read and type at well above her age level. And then, later on, Sister Flame's younger sister started playing too, and the three of them would play as a family.
To give you an idea of Sister Flame's age when she started playing, she called Clockworks "clicky-clacks" and when she watched her dad play his hero her basic instinct was to help people in trouble she saw on the street. The story of That Little Girl (who was nearly a teenager when CoH "died" at the hands of NC$oft) was just such an inspiration. City of Titans shouldn't be doing anything that makes parents "think twice" about letting their children play the game right along with them (and the rest of the Community).
Why?
Because we're Heroes. This is what we do.

You know, this is an excellent point. However, given that this game will have a "teen" rating to start with, I could easily see their being content in there that would be objectionable to those parents.

However, if, in addition to an "adult" zone, you also had a zone for younger kids - maybe one that not only had safe content, but could also help teach age-appropriate important lessons, then you now possibly can extend your market reach even further than what a monolithic teen rating would allow, but in the other direction. My children are currently 2 and 4, I would find this attractive.

You will never escape offending some people, but you will get credit for doing your best to accommodate where you can.

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Bodai wrote:
Do you not think it is a little selfish to say that this type of material does *not* belong in a game like COH? You find it objectionable, it does not fit your vision of what it should be, therefore there is no place for it? Virtual worlds are basically limitless in size and I think there is room to accommodate all kinds of tastes. And no-one would be forced to go anywhere they don't want to.

Bodai wrote:
You can have your candy-land filled with super-kittens, just don't take away my red light district or demilitarized zone.

Even though PvP in CoH was limited to its own specific areas it was still a matter of constant debate on the CoH forums. It would seem even if you kept the "mature" stuff to its own segregated areas of the game you'd still have constant quibbling over its purpose and/or legitimacy.
As others have mentioned it does appear that the Devs of CoT have a more "shades of grey" mindset so perhaps we may get more mature themes and situations than what you described as "Scooby-Doo" level villainy. I still feel that with good writing and planning there's a lot you can do and explore storywise and still maintain an overall Teen Rated environment. This'll probably have to be the compromise we'll have to accept with this.

So, what you are telling me is that even if there was a "badlands" zone, that popped up a disclaimer warning all who enter what lies beyond (assuming you were old enough to enter at all) as well as an associated forum with similar controls, that you and others simply couldn't help yourselves and would somehow end up there. Or, it's mere existence bothers you to the point you can't tolerate.

In real life, the bad areas of town are not necessarily clearly marked, but it is easy to do in a virtual world. Let's think in three dimensions and take advantage of that.

You lost me on your PvP point, I think I see what you are trying to say, but really it isn't germane. Adult content and PvP have no problem being mutually exclusive. I think your more eluding the the viability of PvP as it was in COX, which is really a separate discussion.

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Cinnder wrote:
Cinnder wrote:

I think the dev inclination on this indicated by Terlin's response above is probably the most pragmatic from a s/w developer's viewpoint, so I'm not arguing the main point of this. However, allow me to point out that the lovely and heart-warming stories of family play mentioned above -- and they are indeed lovely and heart-warming -- are red herrings as regards Bodai's original point. The suggestion of having more mature areas with some sort of age-verification-based access in no way affects the ability of the game to support that kind of wonderful family interaction. Any player that was not interested could simply not go there.

Thank you! Thank you! Cinnder, reading comprehension is not dead!

These are nice stories, I could tell some myself - including the times where we able to cheer up people who were terminally ill, or suffered from some form of abuse. None of us would want to jeopardize the powerful community aspect of MMO's like COX. What these nice anecdotes are not saying is how having an adult content area (as well as maybe an area for young children) would harm this aspect... I would argue it could enhance it.

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

Doing that Fractures The Community by balkanizing it. Furthermore, the ... (*ahem*) ... "content" ... (*cough*) ... of the more mature areas simply would not remain CONFINED to those areas, because it would "leak out" into other parts of the game. It's simply UNpossible to completely compartmentalize that kind of content so as to NOT have it "leak" out of its defined areas.
Or to put it another way, if you have a zone dedicated to Chuck Norris Jokes, do you REALLY think the Chuck Norris Jokers will ONLY tell their jokes while they're inside the Chuck Norris Joke Zone? Really? And if they DON'T ... what are you gonna do about it? Huh? Huh? Huh-huh? What's going to happen when the "trollers" take their Witty Banter on the road and start doing it in other zones too?
What you're overlooking is the FACT that Mature Content is a SOCIAL ASPECT of the game, and you can't exactly "wall off" the SOCIAL portions of a Community all that successfully without risking REAL HARM to the HEALTH of that Community overall. This isn't something you can conveniently "put in a box" and keep it inside of that box and never have it get out. Thinking that you CAN do that says a great deal more about the people making such an assertion than it does about the reality that would result from making such a move.

Wow, I couldn't disagree with you more. Because you can do exactly that.

I don't know you personally, so I don't know your background, situation, or how you were raised and I would not want to attack you personally either. So I guess we will have to just agree to disagree.

Do you have an example from a game or situation where this happened, that you can use as an example? Because otherwise this is just what you "think" would happen. It's called FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).

Does having hazard zones you can't enter because they are outside your current level range fracture the community? I guess so, but that doesn't mean it is a bad thing.

The "balkans" would be a good name for the adult zone, btw. Now you are thinking!!

I don't see a problem "walling off" a portion of the game. The different servers in COX had different corresponding areas in the forums. I never went there, because I had no characters on those servers. Some games have servers that are for strict role-playing, and they won't appreciate you going there if you are not going to role play.

I think the "fractures" you speak of have always been there, you just never noticed them because you were happy in your part of the community, as you should be, and you had no reason to go into the other one's.

Unless you are saying it will be so much fun and attractive in the adult zone, that you will feel left out?

People sometimes raise a fuss at first when someone wants to build an adult video store. And of course you might not want it right next to a grade school... although I have been to many countries where exactly that happens because there is no zoning to prevent it (Japan). But, the harmony is maintained because people have a mature attitude about it, and they pass that understanding on to their children by example, rather than saying "don't go there" or "don't ask about that". Just as there is a point kids reach when it is time for "the birds and the bees".

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Cinnder wrote:
Cinnder wrote:

I sincerely apologise if I said something so offensive that it warranted that level of dismissiveness in reply. You have so many other logical and informative posts on this forum that I'm honestly surprised to see such an ASCII-graphical response.
I'm concerned that you seem to be conflating chat with game content. The social aspects you describe are independent of game content. Chuck Norris jokers could spout their jokes regardless of whether there were a Chuck Norris joke zone.
What Bodai was advocating was an area where the game content itself could be more mature. Content <> chat. Content is restricted to the area in which is it realised. E.g. you could not have Mothership raids in AP. There was nothing to stop people chatting about mothership raids outside of RWZ, but there was also nothing to stop them from talking about any other mature topic (aside from the profanity filter.)
I'm not arguing the point of whether we should have such an area: I think it causes too many difficulties for the devs, including your point about fracturing the community (though this is only because it cordons some folks off in a small area). Besides, we already have redname response on this. All I'm doing is pointing out fallacious logic and asking folks to keep their arguments relevant, because I dislike when people use emotional tangents to derail a discussion.

See, me and Cinnder need to go to the adult zone and have a few beers ;-)

We actually don't agree on-point, but that doesn't mean we can't have thoughtful discussion on the topic.

I don't know, would the point we are trying to make be more clear if I go and load up some ascii art about it? I guess some things can't be said without an emphasis aid....maybe? I have some in mind, but I would need to keep it in the adult area ;-(

-Bodai

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
adult content in teen game is

adult content in teen game is a slippery slope. What was it, a GTA game where you enter a code and have sex with a chick or something. Still raised a lot of outrage about kids playing the game, many at an age where they had no business IMO playing GTA to begin with code or not.

Usually games get rated on the highest level of content in the game. Like a game could be relatively Teen level but one scene of graphic torture could earn it an M rating or AO rating even if locked behinda code or separate zone with warning signs. All it will take is some kid getting caught in there and some outraged mother/father making a fuss to the media about it and PR nightmare.

I was skittish about teaming or even seeing young kids in teen game, especially in areas where lot of ERP goes on. And slightly annoyed but understanding when on team and some parent want the chat to go from rated T to rated E because their 5-7 year old wants to play. It's a rated T game for a reason! And me personally with the type of chat that goes on (went on) in COX, I wouldn't allow my 5-7 year old to play that game. Some people was just plain creepy to the point of borderline pedo behavior that sometimes went into the text book AO rating thing. I seen this dude, a very frequent player, trying to ERP with a 7 year old player, even after everyone told him to leave it be because the girl is only 7. I think he got reported and banned. Used to see him every day but day after that never seen him again.

But of course player content according to the box says rated. But it's a different story when game added stuff or game features added to game. And it's also why many online teen rated games have rules that reflect teen environment such as no excessive profanity (even if it laxly enforced) while some rated M games make no mention against profanity use and or anything goes rules. Of course that don't stop younger kids from access or parents from buying their kids those types of games.

Maybe it could get skirted by with adult area if it was actually age verified but then again it may actually affect the actual rating of the game if applicable to this game. Either way a warning system of what can happen In game is good. Like if they are entering an free for all curse like a sailor and crude sex jokes are allowed, it should be clear warning. May not stop the parents against violent/sex/profanity games from making a fuss when their kid wonder into that zone though.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Terlin wrote:
Terlin wrote:

Well, as a writer for the project, I have been told 'point-blank' to stick to the teen-rating, and we have a lengthy guidebook on what that means. That does not mean we will never change our minds, but for the moment we are locked into ESRB-T.
Also, as someone who has spent way too much time with lawyers and defending products from liability lawsuits, you can't knowingly include a feature without being held responsible for it. Its one type of problem if individuals are engaged in 'mature' behavior, but allowing or encouraging it, even in a limited way, raises the level of accountability for the company.
In our case, that's true in both a legal sense and to the community. There is already plenty of controversy over it without bringing that inside the game.
-
Terlin

This is a good point to bring up. But, as the lawyers would tell you, it is not without precedent. Age of Conan is a good example, but there are many more. Those companies felt it was worth the liability risk, and after that it might just be a cost/benefit analysis. I am certainly not saying this feature must be in there, and certainly not at launch.

I would love to see that guidebook you speak of, it would also be useful if COT has an "architect" like section for player-created content.

As a writer, were there or are there topics you wish you could do, but can't because you are restricted by the rules in the guidebook?

It is very interesting how you point out that you were, as you say, told "point-blank" about the rating of the material. That says to me more than anything else here that it is not without merit.

-Bodai

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
To be honest, the entire

To be honest, the entire "ESRB" issue isn't necessarily relevant here. ESRB rates the game-produced content. For online MMO games, there is an additonal "Interactive Element"

Users Interact - Indicates possible exposure to unfiltered/uncensored user-generated content, including user-to-user communications and media sharing via social media and networks.

"Online Interactions Not Rated by the ESRB" - Warns those who intend to play the game online about possible exposure to chat (text, audio, video) or other types of user-generated content (e.g., maps, skins) that have not been considered in the ESRB rating assignment

This is where the possibility of "adult" activity is factored in, with all its risks. The devs will likely adhere to "teen" rating, but by its nature, the MMO will have the interaction warning, with no penalty to the dev-created content (now, if the devs made mature outfits, animations, and stories, it would.

So, provide age verification?

I still vote no. That can be seen as facilitating and expecting a beyond-teen environment.

Look, even if "kids could be here" isn't a factor, there's a level of decorum that some adults still need in public discourse to be comfortable. Keeping a teen-level exchange in public channels is an easy way to set a standard that gives a great range of communication while still preserving a good standard (have you checked some of the books on high school reading lists? You'd be surprised what's permissible to teen standards.

If you go beyond those standards and someone around objects, then you can graciously acknowledge them and take it to private channels. Very little harm or foul. Heck, make a private global chat channel, give it a warning message on sign-in, and you've got a private space with a reasonable warning to those that enter.

AmbiDreamer
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 5 days ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/07/2013 - 22:49
jag40 wrote:
jag40 wrote:

adult content in teen game is a slippery slope. What was it, a GTA game where you enter a code and have sex with a chick or something. Still raised a lot of outrage about kids playing the game, many at an age where they had no business IMO playing GTA to begin with code or not.

If I'm not mistaken, it isn't accessible without playing a mod to the game, secret code or not. Small difference which says a great deal about how serious this is taken; they removed access to it from the game altogether and still took heat over it. Even though without a mod, *no one* could access it.

Quote:

So, provide age verification?

Begging the question of the benefits of an AO zone are worth the hassle of going through to provide content which a portion of the audience can't even experience.

Longtime City of Heroes player, longtime writer. :) Working in Nebraska.
COT: Mission tips writer, studying Cinema 4D animation program

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
AmbiDreamer wrote:
AmbiDreamer wrote:

Bodai wrote:
And no-one would be forced to go anywhere they don't want to.
-Bodai

The problem with that seems to be that ratings aren't included to make sure children aren't forced to go into a mature area in a game; the problem is that they'll go there voluntarily if they can. It'd be like making requiring ID optional for the customer at the local bar.
Aside from Terlin's comment above, if simply walling off objectionable content was enough to alter the rating, we never would have experienced the joys of the hot coffee mod in Grand Theft Auto San Andreas.

That is an interesting example you bring up. Grand Theft Auto was/is already rated mature (17+), but the "hot coffee" mod I guess would have raised it to "AO" (adult only) maybe?

I think the underlying point in there is not about the fact that Take 2 Interactive "allowed" that content to exist in any way, but more that I think there were allot of teenagers under the age of 17 who had that game in the first place.

Either way, my statement above is not about underage people being exposed to content they shouldn't see, it was about consenting adults choosing to go there, or not, if they themselves find it objectionable.

Having reasonable controls to keep the underage out, or how effective that may or may not be, is a bit of a separate issue, right?

I don't think it is fair to say that you can't do it because of the chance any underage individuals might view inappropriate content, despite completely reasonable controls in place to prevent it. If you as the company purposely put content somewhere because you knew it would drum up sales at the risk of the wrong people seeing it, then different story, and shame on them.

-Bodai

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
Actually due to that hot

Actually due to that hot coffee incident (yeah I couldn't remember the name of it and it's the same thing I was referring to) GTA San Andreas got reassigned an AO rating for that. And most stores had ot pull it from the shelves due to regulations against selling of AO in some stores.

The PC version, they madea patch that completely removed it from the game and the PC version got reverted back to rated M.

The greatest hit version also have it removed and is also reverted back to rated M.

And yeah as stated by Ambidreamer, it couldn't be accessed without the patch at all by anyone. Yet still created great controvery, where Take-Two and maybe Rockstar (cant remember clearly about the Rockstar role in it.) almost got sued, the game got recalled and re-released with the "Cold Coffee" patch.

There probably are some Hot Coffee GTA:SA versions out there still.

All of that over one scene that wasn't even available without an extra mod.

But Bodei, you make a good point there.

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

...snip.....
I don't think it is fair to say that you can't do it because of the chance any underage individuals might view inappropriate content, despite completely reasonable controls in place to prevent it.
-Bodai

Unfortunately, providing age verification can be seen differently by the rating agency. By facilitating private online mature chat with age verification, you could be seen as acknowledging that your game expects to support that level of content.

It's a weird (and sad) situation where trying to offer something questionable in a responsible manner can get you more problems than pretending that the quesionable thing didn't exist.

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Bodai wrote:
...snip.....
I don't think it is fair to say that you can't do it because of the chance any underage individuals might view inappropriate content, despite completely reasonable controls in place to prevent it.
-Bodai

Unfortunately, providing age verification can be seen differently by the rating agency. By facilitating private online mature chat with age verification, you could be seen as acknowledging that your game expects to support that level of content.
It's a weird (and sad) situation where trying to offer something questionable in a responsible manner can get you more problems than pretending that the quesionable thing didn't exist.

This is true. I personally didn't think about that part.

Scott Jackson
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 10 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/20/2013 - 20:13
Perhaps the ability for

Perhaps the ability for players to create content, plus allowing them to mod some aspects of the game (visible only on the player's machine) - can resolve this without much effort or complaint? I have no personal objection to the proposal, but the difficulties of implementing a system to manage it seem too great, given the lack of interest within MWM to do so.

Since the developers will not create "mature audience" regions or storylines if they didn't already want them, what else is feasible? They may at least be willing to provide an easy option for individual players / supergroups to modify locally-stored files (costume graphics, world textures, dialog) to be outside the Teen rating...or for any other purpose. Combined with content creation tools, lightly-modded clients might deliver a fair amount of what the proposal seeks. Content creation could take one of the following paths: designated flags/tags in the player-generated mission database to cover the possibility that "experience may change during online play", or if the central database is off-limits for publishing adult-rated content, some way for individual players to store missions out of view but still play them as a team, somewhat like CoH's unpublished AE missions.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Darth Fez wrote:
Darth Fez wrote:

Some problems I see with this kind of approach are:
1. Are there any examples where gating systems such as age verification have worked? Are there any gating system strong enough to keep out those who shouldn't experience this content even when people start talking about how it is awesome and they wished the whole game were like that? If not, the entire premise is dead in the water.
2. Is the expectation that a 'mature zone' will be fire and forget or is the expectation that, in addition to providing additional PvE and PvP content for the rest of the game, they would have to provide new 'mature' content?
3. Good luck trying to keep the mission architect out of this debate.
We live in a society in which many people are all too eager to blame the misbehaving of their 13-year old grandson on his having played GTA 5. People don't care what rating the developer, the ESRB, or anyone else has slapped on teh game. They care about what their children see. Doubly so if the game they bought is ostensibly rated suitable for ages 13+. So, unless someone has a watertight answer to #1, I don't see how this is at all a feasible idea.

You are saying that you can't do it unless your controls are guaranteed 100%, which is of course impossible.

To answer your question #1, what are you looking for here? Is the fact that Age of Conan (rated M) has age controls in place (I know I played it) and they are still in business and I have not seen any significant outcry over if children getting into it evidence enough? What kind of proof would be enough for you?

Do I think an MMO that requires a subscription and a credit card to get into in the first place will be easier to lock down than a console game they can "borrow" from a friend? Yes.

Can you have "reasonable due diligence" as the lawyers would call it, as do so many of the other companies that sell games and products that are rated M or AO do? Yes.

Do you need to have a little bit of a back bone because at the end of the day people can and do, as you elude to, sue you for anything they want regardless of the laws or controls in place? Yes. Does it mean they will win? Maybe.

Does it mean you make the game rated teen (as planned) and someone sues you anyway because their 10-year-old saw something in the game that game them nightmares? Yes.

You can only take reasonable responsibility for yourself and the things you have direct control over, you can't take responsibility for other people's lack of responsibility. I don't think we need to hash out that whole argument here because it is well debated over decades / centuries.

If, all other things being equal, there is simply not enough demand for mature content in the game such that it is not sustainable in the business model, then there is no problem. Let the market take care of itself. If you want a guarantee, buy a toaster.

See Cinnder's point about fallacious logic.

-Bodai

Here is an appropriate quote for you Fez:
From yoda to luke skywalker when he couldn't pull the x-wing out of the swamp. Luke - "I don't believe it" Yoda - "that, is why you failed"

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Amerikatt wrote:
Amerikatt wrote:

One of the best examples of comic book villainy I remember is when Lex Luthor enticed a waitress to leave her husband, supposedly to run away with him.
Naturally, right after she hung up the phone, having told her husband she was leaving him, she turned around and Lex's limo was gone!
No graphic sex or violence nor any coarse language, but villainy at its finest. Good, psychological drama.
While I can certainly see a somewhat sanitized version of a red light district being in *some* sort of game, I don't believe that CoT, as a spiritual successor to CoH, would be the right place for that sort of thing. Perhaps in a single-player game or a future generation MMO not produced by MWM.
I remember "Batman: Year One", where Bruce was prowling a red-light district, but that was in a comic book and there was nothing particularly graphic in that. However, I still have to defend CoT/CoH as having to be family-friendly, even if a larger percentage of the demographic would lean more toward grown-ups.

For me, it is about not just being the successor but also surpassing the original COX.

And, specifically, I found the "villainous" content in COV falling short.

-Bodai

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

Amerikatt wrote:
One of the best examples of comic book villainy I remember is when Lex Luthor enticed a waitress to leave her husband, supposedly to run away with him.
Naturally, right after she hung up the phone, having told her husband she was leaving him, she turned around and Lex's limo was gone!
No graphic sex or violence nor any coarse language, but villainy at its finest. Good, psychological drama.
While I can certainly see a somewhat sanitized version of a red light district being in *some* sort of game, I don't believe that CoT, as a spiritual successor to CoH, would be the right place for that sort of thing. Perhaps in a single-player game or a future generation MMO not produced by MWM.
I remember "Batman: Year One", where Bruce was prowling a red-light district, but that was in a comic book and there was nothing particularly graphic in that. However, I still have to defend CoT/CoH as having to be family-friendly, even if a larger percentage of the demographic would lean more toward grown-ups.

For me, it is about not just being the successor but also surpassing the original COX.
And, specifically, I found the "villainous" content in COV falling short.
-Bodai

Indeed. When I play a villain I want to play a villain. Some are megalomaniacs classic comic book villain, some are just misunderstood, some are just plain wave nuts, some just want to burn the world, some want to bust everything up, some think they are doing right, and some just want to slowly take someone apart joint by joint. But none want to be a mere lacky being told what to do all the time.

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Bodai wrote:
...snip.....
I don't think it is fair to say that you can't do it because of the chance any underage individuals might view inappropriate content, despite completely reasonable controls in place to prevent it.
-Bodai

Unfortunately, providing age verification can be seen differently by the rating agency. By facilitating private online mature chat with age verification, you could be seen as acknowledging that your game expects to support that level of content.
It's a weird (and sad) situation where trying to offer something questionable in a responsible manner can get you more problems than pretending that the quesionable thing didn't exist.

I would say that you would most definitely be acknowledging that it happens, no ifs, no buts.

Actually, quite interestingly, how would you go around the "age verification"?

Paying by debit/credit card?

Unless you have GTC's available, you can pretty much guarentee that ALL payments will be via credit/debit card (or if not, paypal).

Shame that 16 year olds in the UK can get a debit card, and not everyone has a credit card available.

And even if the player *doesnt* have one available (ie a child) then their parents would be paying.

So you cannot just rely on "method of payment" as age verification...

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
jag40 wrote:
jag40 wrote:

adult content in teen game is a slippery slope. What was it, a GTA game where you enter a code and have sex with a chick or something. Still raised a lot of outrage about kids playing the game, many at an age where they had no business IMO playing GTA to begin with code or not.
Usually games get rated on the highest level of content in the game. Like a game could be relatively Teen level but one scene of graphic torture could earn it an M rating or AO rating even if locked behinda code or separate zone with warning signs. All it will take is some kid getting caught in there and some outraged mother/father making a fuss to the media about it and PR nightmare.
I was skittish about teaming or even seeing young kids in teen game, especially in areas where lot of ERP goes on. And slightly annoyed but understanding when on team and some parent want the chat to go from rated T to rated E because their 5-7 year old wants to play. It's a rated T game for a reason! And me personally with the type of chat that goes on (went on) in COX, I wouldn't allow my 5-7 year old to play that game. Some people was just plain creepy to the point of borderline pedo behavior that sometimes went into the text book AO rating thing. I seen this dude, a very frequent player, trying to ERP with a 7 year old player, even after everyone told him to leave it be because the girl is only 7. I think he got reported and banned. Used to see him every day but day after that never seen him again.
But of course player content according to the box says rated. But it's a different story when game added stuff or game features added to game. And it's also why many online teen rated games have rules that reflect teen environment such as no excessive profanity (even if it laxly enforced) while some rated M games make no mention against profanity use and or anything goes rules. Of course that don't stop younger kids from access or parents from buying their kids those types of games.
Maybe it could get skirted by with adult area if it was actually age verified but then again it may actually affect the actual rating of the game if applicable to this game. Either way a warning system of what can happen In game is good. Like if they are entering an free for all curse like a sailor and crude sex jokes are allowed, it should be clear warning. May not stop the parents against violent/sex/profanity games from making a fuss when their kid wonder into that zone though.

Yes, let me add to this, because this is good.

- correct me if I am wrong, but disabling the profanity filter in COX was a check box that anyone could un-check, there was nothing restricting anyone from turning it off. Should NCsoft be sued for that? (well, we can hope).

- I too ran into times when we were teaming with someone who was very young, under 10 but I can't remember exactly how old. Do you know what we did? Everyone on the team was careful, we "toned it down" and everyone was happy. We took responsibility, even telling others to be careful as we went along. Those are the types of people I team with.

- And again, I have myself reported people who we doing or saying things that were inappropriate for a teen rated game, or if I knew there were younger people online at the time.

To some of your points, I think you would probably have to ask the ESRB rating people ahead of time, what level of "separation" is required to be able to maintain different ratings, or indeed is it possible at all without having separate games entirely?

-Bodai

- In Japan, a grade schooler can walk through the red light district of Tokyo at midnight, and no-one will mess with them. Do you know why? Because the yakuza (japanese mafia) would kill them if they tried.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
jag40 wrote:
jag40 wrote:

But Bodei, you make a good point there.

And that is all I ask. Perfectly OK to disagree, and we may even disagree on the ways you and I disagree.

I am prepared to lose, and I have my recipe for crow standing by at all times ;-)

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Bodai wrote:
...snip.....
I don't think it is fair to say that you can't do it because of the chance any underage individuals might view inappropriate content, despite completely reasonable controls in place to prevent it.
-Bodai

Unfortunately, providing age verification can be seen differently by the rating agency. By facilitating private online mature chat with age verification, you could be seen as acknowledging that your game expects to support that level of content.
It's a weird (and sad) situation where trying to offer something questionable in a responsible manner can get you more problems than pretending that the quesionable thing didn't exist.

Right, I think the nuance here is, how you actually really did it. Would anyone / everyone need to do the age verification?

I suppose technically you should, to make sure that everyone who is playing is in fact a teen, or has the consent of their parents. Does the ESRB require that?

I am thinking more along the lines of you make it clear just how the content would be separated to the ESRB people, and then perhaps debate would ensue. Maybe they would say OK, or maybe they would say nope, you can't have multiple ratings based on different areas of the game, it would have to be a separate game entirely.

I for one would be very curious to be a part of that conversation.

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Scott Jackson wrote:
Scott Jackson wrote:

Perhaps the ability for players to create content, plus allowing them to mod some aspects of the game (visible only on the player's machine) - can resolve this without much effort or complaint? I have no personal objection to the proposal, but the difficulties of implementing a system to manage it seem too great, given the lack of interest within MWM to do so.

I would not say there is "lack of interest". They definitely care about the issue and they have a "book" on it even, but that is not the same thing. And it is very early.

One of the reasons I started this thread, it to stimulate discussion as this is a "community driven" effort from the start. So, I am sure they would consider it if there were justifiable demographic interest.

You know what my vote is ;-) And you have to start somewhere.

I know with NCsoft, I probably would not even get this far.

-Bodai

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
Age of conan may not be a

Age of conan may not be a good example to use. They had verifiction, but there were plenty of self-proclaimed minors in general chat during my frequent-but-intermittent visits there, so it, if anytihng, shows how such elements are not effective at actually verifying age. No, they weren't sued out of existence, but from some accounts, "M" rated online games have paid higher insurance premiums for liability risks associated with the "M" rating. That's a real business cost beyond development time.

As I noted before, though, the way the rating system works, player-generated content should not risk the ESRB rating in the slightest... unless the developers directly facilitated that user behavior.

This is more about maintaining a community standard in discourse.

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

jag40 wrote:
adult content in teen game is a slippery slope. What was it, a GTA game where you enter a code and have sex with a chick or something. Still raised a lot of outrage about kids playing the game, many at an age where they had no business IMO playing GTA to begin with code or not.
Usually games get rated on the highest level of content in the game. Like a game could be relatively Teen level but one scene of graphic torture could earn it an M rating or AO rating even if locked behinda code or separate zone with warning signs. All it will take is some kid getting caught in there and some outraged mother/father making a fuss to the media about it and PR nightmare.
I was skittish about teaming or even seeing young kids in teen game, especially in areas where lot of ERP goes on. And slightly annoyed but understanding when on team and some parent want the chat to go from rated T to rated E because their 5-7 year old wants to play. It's a rated T game for a reason! And me personally with the type of chat that goes on (went on) in COX, I wouldn't allow my 5-7 year old to play that game. Some people was just plain creepy to the point of borderline pedo behavior that sometimes went into the text book AO rating thing. I seen this dude, a very frequent player, trying to ERP with a 7 year old player, even after everyone told him to leave it be because the girl is only 7. I think he got reported and banned. Used to see him every day but day after that never seen him again.
But of course player content according to the box says rated. But it's a different story when game added stuff or game features added to game. And it's also why many online teen rated games have rules that reflect teen environment such as no excessive profanity (even if it laxly enforced) while some rated M games make no mention against profanity use and or anything goes rules. Of course that don't stop younger kids from access or parents from buying their kids those types of games.
Maybe it could get skirted by with adult area if it was actually age verified but then again it may actually affect the actual rating of the game if applicable to this game. Either way a warning system of what can happen In game is good. Like if they are entering an free for all curse like a sailor and crude sex jokes are allowed, it should be clear warning. May not stop the parents against violent/sex/profanity games from making a fuss when their kid wonder into that zone though.

Yes, let me add to this, because this is good.
- correct me if I am wrong, but disabling the profanity filter in COX was a check box that anyone could un-check, there was nothing restricting anyone from turning it off. Should NCsoft be sued for that? (well, we can hope).
- I too ran into times when we were teaming with someone who was very young, under 10 but I can't remember exactly how old. Do you know what we did? Everyone on the team was careful, we "toned it down" and everyone was happy. We took responsibility, even telling others to be careful as we went along. Those are the types of people I team with.
- And again, I have myself reported people who we doing or saying things that were inappropriate for a teen rated game, or if I knew there were younger people online at the time.
To some of your points, I think you would probably have to ask the ESRB rating people ahead of time, what level of "separation" is required to be able to maintain different ratings, or indeed is it possible at all without having separate games entirely?
-Bodai
- In Japan, a grade schooler can walk through the red light district of Tokyo at midnight, and no-one will mess with them. Do you know why? Because the yakuza (japanese mafia) would kill them if they tried.

yup there was profanity filter but you might be surprised at how many people didn't know about it or rather forgot about it because iirc it was default filter profanity meaning if they are seeing profanity either them or someone on that account turned the filter off.

In today's world, a person can sue or get sued for anything. It's about making the right case to the right judge. Get a judge more slanted towards personal responsibility, the case probably would get thrown out. Get a judge that have a chip against games, NCSOFT could very well be sued. In the court system it's sometimes not about who is actually responsible but who is more convincing in the finger pointing.

Well it might be possible to have a game with one main rating and another rating for other features. Many online games on box says main rating usually rated T but online content Unrated.

And usually I'm on a team that tones it down around young ones, but also been on teams but not for long for those that took the opportunity to turn it up instead of down "to prove a point" especially when they obviously type obscene stuff to bypass the filter system or adult subjects just to be a butt because now they know a kid is on board.

But should NCSOFT be responsible for that when they put in controls and those that either try to bypass the rules or break them and get reported and they react, no I don't think they should be sued. But then you have some companies that put in the controls but don't make a move to prevent people from bypassing it or taking action against those rule breakers. In that case it could be argued they are responsible. Kind of like if a cop is trying to catch a criminal and the criminal run over someone in many places, the criminal is responsible but in some other places the police department get sued anyways. but if a criminal is breaking the law and the cop does nothing then in a way it could be viewed as the police department is now partially responsible even though the law is written and his presence is supposed to be deterrent against law breaking.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Age of conan may not be a good example to use. They had verifiction, but there were plenty of self-proclaimed minors in general chat during my frequent-but-intermittent visits there, so it, if anytihng, shows how such elements are not effective at actually verifying age. No, they weren't sued out of existence, but from some accounts, "M" rated online games have paid higher insurance premiums for liability risks associated with the "M" rating. That's a real business cost beyond development time.

Hey, I smell stretch goal here... additional funds for insurance premiums so Bodai doesn't get so bored that it starts sucking away his will to live....

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
<<>>

<<>>

jag40 wrote:

But should NCSOFT be responsible for that when they put in controls and those that either try to bypass the rules or break them and get reported and they react, no I don't think they should be sued. But then you have some companies that put in the controls but don't make a move to prevent people from bypassing it or taking action against those rule breakers. In that case it could be argued they are responsible. Kind of like if a cop is trying to catch a criminal and the criminal run over someone in many places, the criminal is responsible but in some other places the police department get sued anyways. but if a criminal is breaking the law and the cop does nothing then in a way it could be viewed as the police department is now partially responsible even though the law is written and his presence is supposed to be deterrent against law breaking.

So, why did New Jersey get all the toxic waste, and California get all the lawyers?

New Jersey had first pick.

-Bodai

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

<<>>
jag40 wrote:
But should NCSOFT be responsible for that when they put in controls and those that either try to bypass the rules or break them and get reported and they react, no I don't think they should be sued. But then you have some companies that put in the controls but don't make a move to prevent people from bypassing it or taking action against those rule breakers. In that case it could be argued they are responsible. Kind of like if a cop is trying to catch a criminal and the criminal run over someone in many places, the criminal is responsible but in some other places the police department get sued anyways. but if a criminal is breaking the law and the cop does nothing then in a way it could be viewed as the police department is now partially responsible even though the law is written and his presence is supposed to be deterrent against law breaking.

So, why did New Jersey get all the toxic waste, and California get all the lawyers?
New Jersey had first pick.
-Bodai

lol.

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
If you want a better example

If you want a better example of an online system that applies mixed content with self-applied filters and age verification, check out Second Life. Their content ranges from casual commercial to practically pornographic, users select the content level they want to see/ not see, and if you try to select more mature content than the default, you age-verify.

Still not arguing FOR this system, but let's not pretend that this is some dark area that's never been visited before.

DeathSheepFromHell
DeathSheepFromHell's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2013 - 15:08
Frankly, my personal (and

Frankly, my personal (and note, it is *only* that -- personal) view is that if you can't say it in a T-rated environment, you're not doing a very good job of telling the story. Doesn't matter what the story is, really. About the only things that an M rating locks out are the *explicit* representations of several subjects. Being a video game does present some additional challenges on this front, of course, but I can attest to the fact that there was some remarkably dark writing on redside in CoX, if you had the patience to find it. Maybe not a lot of it, though I'm not sure I can really blame them for that since it tends to actually not be very popular even among the 'villain' crowd, at least not in more than small doses.

But it was there. And when it worked, hoo boy, it *really* worked. The only storyline that ever made any of my characters stand up inside my head, take me by the ears, and say "*CENSORED* NO, I AM NOT OKAY WITH DOING THAT" was red side. Because that's one of the subjects that red-side stories get to explore more easily than blue-side: *are* there lines a given character will not cross? Why or why not? What implications would that have for how others view them? If they have those lines, does coming up against them cause other changes in their approach to the world?

Funny thing? It wasn't one of the 'morality' stories. Plenty of villainous characters wouldn't have blinked twice at it (nor should they have, necessarily). It just happened to be one that tied to some other bits of lore, and for various reasons, caused that particular character to have a moment of actual sympathy. Worst thing you can ever do to a villain. :)

Second thought: once you cross into 'M' territory, you really need to go *well* into that to not basically just be making crude jokes. It requires a whole different focus for the storytelling, and most of the ways I can think of offhand are actually not very suited to long-term play anyway; most M-rated games pretty much ramp things up nearly constantly, well into the ridiculous range (and then some), simply because otherwise you lose the impact of what that rating makes available to you.


Developer Emeritus
and multipurpose sheep

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
jag40 wrote:
jag40 wrote:

...snip...
In today's world, a person can sue or get sued for anything. It's about making the right case to the right judge. Get a judge more slanted towards personal responsibility, the case probably would get thrown out. Get a judge that have a chip against games, NCSOFT could very well be sued. In the court system it's sometimes not about who is actually responsible but who is more convincing in the finger pointing.
...snip....

And note that "being sued" doesn't even mean you have to lose. You're only likely to be awarded legal fees when you win if the lawsuit was significantly frivolous or meritless... otherwise, you're paying lots of $ just to get a judge to affirm that you don't have to pay someone lots of $. Sometimes its better to just avoid the risk.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

If you want a better example of an online system that applies mixed content with self-applied filters and age verification, check out Second Life. Their content ranges from casual commercial to practically pornographic, users select the content level they want to see/ not see, and if you try to select more mature content than the default, you age-verify.
Still not arguing FOR this system, but let's not pretend that this is some dark area that's never been visited before.

Hmm, never played SL myself. Very good point, I like your example better.

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

jag40 wrote:
...snip...
In today's world, a person can sue or get sued for anything. It's about making the right case to the right judge. Get a judge more slanted towards personal responsibility, the case probably would get thrown out. Get a judge that have a chip against games, NCSOFT could very well be sued. In the court system it's sometimes not about who is actually responsible but who is more convincing in the finger pointing.
...snip....
And note that "being sued" doesn't even mean you have to lose. You're only likely to be awarded legal fees when you win if the lawsuit was significantly frivolous or meritless... otherwise, you're paying lots of $ just to get a judge to affirm that you don't have to pay someone lots of $. Sometimes its better to just avoid the risk.

Yup, I was waiting for someone to say this. I know I am in favor of stamping this concept on every good idea anyone ever comes up with, just because I am a "glass is half full" kind of guy all the way.

There is an excellent George Carlin quote about this, but it is on the colorful side.

They had a great bit on this in the first Jurassic Park movie, if anyone remembers the "blood sucking lawyers".

-Bodai

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

chase wrote:
If you want a better example of an online system that applies mixed content with self-applied filters and age verification, check out Second Life. Their content ranges from casual commercial to practically pornographic, users select the content level they want to see/ not see, and if you try to select more mature content than the default, you age-verify.
Still not arguing FOR this system, but let's not pretend that this is some dark area that's never been visited before.

Hmm, never played SL myself. Very good point, I like your example better.
-Bodai

Several years ago, I was at a conference where every academic was clamoring that second life was going to become the "3d web" cnet, dell, and IBM were all creating their own presences there, it was being used for social experiments and simulations... user generated content that can be traded and sold. a real currency exchange. the hype impressed me.

I had my first warning before I ever signed in- when I googled it, the top result was an interview between a reporter starting SL and a SL "greeter" on the starter island.One question was "So, explain to me how second life isn't just a rampant pit of cybering"... her response, "It is SO a rancid pit of cybering."

Regardless, I still signed up, At that time, you got to choose your own first name, but had to use a last name from a drop down. I chose "Chase" because I'm terribly unoriginal and then saw a rather scottish-sounding name, so I chose "McCann." Now, when you're going to join an online community known to cater to virtually every deviance, a name that sounds like "Chase my can" wasn't probably the wisest choice.

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

jag40 wrote:
...snip...
In today's world, a person can sue or get sued for anything. It's about making the right case to the right judge. Get a judge more slanted towards personal responsibility, the case probably would get thrown out. Get a judge that have a chip against games, NCSOFT could very well be sued. In the court system it's sometimes not about who is actually responsible but who is more convincing in the finger pointing.
...snip....
And note that "being sued" doesn't even mean you have to lose. You're only likely to be awarded legal fees when you win if the lawsuit was significantly frivolous or meritless... otherwise, you're paying lots of $ just to get a judge to affirm that you don't have to pay someone lots of $. Sometimes its better to just avoid the risk.

Indeed.

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Age of conan may not be a good example to use. They had verifiction, but there were plenty of self-proclaimed minors in general chat during my frequent-but-intermittent visits there, so it, if anytihng, shows how such elements are not effective at actually verifying age. No, they weren't sued out of existence, but from some accounts, "M" rated online games have paid higher insurance premiums for liability risks associated with the "M" rating. That's a real business cost beyond development time.
As I noted before, though, the way the rating system works, player-generated content should not risk the ESRB rating in the slightest... unless the developers directly facilitated that user behavior.
This is more about maintaining a community standard in discourse.

Age Of Conan was BBFC rated 18 in the UK, which meant that it was full on illegal to sell it to someone underage in the UK, and even now, with its PEGI 18 rating, the same holds.

Now, if the parent bought it for the person, that is another matter (although in my mind, that says more about the parent than the store).

Lets put it this way... my mother got asked if the game she was buying for her recently... she was buying it for me, and she *almost* got refused the sale as a result of her saying "its for my son"... until she pointed out that her son is 33.

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Gangrel wrote:
Lothic wrote:
Maybe the folks at MWM will be more willing to push the boundaries because they aren't constrained by a huge corporate organization the way Paragon Studios was.

City of Heroes (EU release): 12+ PEGI Rating
City of Villains (EU Release): 16+ PEGI Rating
When they merged the two games together: 16+ PEGI Rating...
I believe that his only happened because City of Villains actually was released as a standalone game, and you never needed to own City of Heroes to play it. Sure it *added* stuff to City of Heroes, but it was an optional purchase. As soon as they merged both of them, City of Heroes *automatically* became 16+.
Or at least, that is how my interpretation of it worked over here in the UK. I could well be wrong, but the PEGI rating of CoH didn't go up until they decided to merge the two games into a single purchase.

Again I understand that CoV was technically "released" as a standalone game and that you did not need to have an active CoH account to play it when it first launched.
But the moment you loaded either CoV (standalone from disc) or the Issue 6 patch of CoH on your computer you had the ENTIRE game there. When I mean the ENTIRE game I mean both CoH and CoV combined. There was never a time when there was ever a seperate CoH client and CoV client. CoV might have appeared like a standalone game from a player account point of view, but it heavily relied on all the code established by CoH because they were in fact really only one game as far as the software was concerned.
Basically the way CoV was released to us was a clever marketing strategy to get people to "rebuy" yet another retail game before they merged everyone's accounts and gave everyone access to both sides. The plan from Day One was to have the two games merged - it wasn't something they only thought of doing after CoV launched. Thus the term "expand-alone".
Obviously the folks in charge of giving games PEGI ratings in the UK were unaware of the overall relationship between CoH and CoV. Had they known what was going on "under the hood" so to speak they would have given CoH a 16+ PEGI rating the day CoV went live because they were always destined to exist as a single united game.
This is why I stopped using the acronym "CoX" many years ago. It may be hard to accept but there was never two games there in the minds of the Devs - it was only CoH from the beginning and there was only ever going to be CoH in the end.

It took them almost 3 years though to get around to merging City of Villains into City of Heroes though (July 2008 according to a quick google search, so I could well be wrong).

You didn't need City of Villains to play the content, and yes, although City of Villains DID add content to "blue side", the same also went the other way, in that owning City of Heroes added content to City of Villains.

I honestly *dont* believe that the PEGI board had the wall pulled over their eyes, though. I believe that they honestly got it correct *at the time of rating*.

Someone with only a City of Heroes account, could *not* access any of the content that warranted the 16+ rating in City of Villains *unless* they also owned City of Villains.

No if's, no buts (ok, barring an account management screw up)

That is how it stood for 2.5/3 years. And only *once* Paragon Studios/NCsoft decided to merge both halves *did* the base game (City of Heroes) get its rating increased.

The same would also stand (I would imagine) if a 18+ Rated expansion was released in the same vein as City of Villains (ie standalone game, also expanded the base game).

If the content is *not* accessible without having your account enabled for it, then the base rating should not be increased.

As soon as the content is available for ALL on a base account, then the game should take on the highest rating possible.

And chase is quite correct (although in my mind, i don't think its a sad thing).

Side note: As far as I am aware, the "age verification" for SL is just entering your date of birth so that you are "old enough"

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
DeathSheepFromHell wrote:
DeathSheepFromHell wrote:

Frankly, my personal (and note, it is *only* that -- personal) view is that if you can't say it in a T-rated environment, you're not doing a very good job of telling the story. Doesn't matter what the story is, really. About the only things that an M rating locks out are the *explicit* representations of several subjects. Being a video game does present some additional challenges on this front, of course, but I can attest to the fact that there was some remarkably dark writing on redside in CoX, if you had the patience to find it. Maybe not a lot of it, though I'm not sure I can really blame them for that since it tends to actually not be very popular even among the 'villain' crowd, at least not in more than small doses.

Now that you mention it, I think one of the best examples of a story where it was actually *very* dark was Kuzco from "The Emperor's New Groove", which is rated G of all things. Some of the other characters too, frankly I don't know how they got away with it. Some of the stuff in that move was absolute gold (sorry).

Conversely, some shows that have adult ratings, and used them appropriately / didn't abuse them I think would be Game of Thrones and True Blood. I think allot of that content was appropriate for the story, and it would be noticeably worse if you tried to censor it out or make a version without it.

I think I have pretty much seen every drop of content there is in COX, I was a badge whore after all. I would very much like to hear about the content you are talking about from COV.

I am certainly not saying it can't be done. But where you are saying that you count it as a mark against a writer who can't keep in inside the T rating, I would say that instead, it also takes a good writer to use mature content the right way. I think the person who "should" have told a story with an "M" rating is just as guilty as the person who "could" have told another story in a "T" rating.

DeathSheepFromHell wrote:

But it was there. And when it worked, hoo boy, it *really* worked. The only storyline that ever made any of my characters stand up inside my head, take me by the ears, and say "*CENSORED* NO, I AM NOT OKAY WITH DOING THAT" was red side. Because that's one of the subjects that red-side stories get to explore more easily than blue-side: *are* there lines a given character will not cross? Why or why not? What implications would that have for how others view them? If they have those lines, does coming up against them cause other changes in their approach to the world?
Funny thing? It wasn't one of the 'morality' stories. Plenty of villainous characters wouldn't have blinked twice at it (nor should they have, necessarily). It just happened to be one that tied to some other bits of lore, and for various reasons, caused that particular character to have a moment of actual sympathy. Worst thing you can ever do to a villain. :)

Well, bring it on ;-)

Now, since you say this, and you are saying that it was actually the exception when this happened, not the rule. Are you saying that this is a problem regardless of rating, and that there is just good writing and bad writing?

DeathSheepFromHell wrote:

Second thought: once you cross into 'M' territory, you really need to go *well* into that to not basically just be making crude jokes. It requires a whole different focus for the storytelling, and most of the ways I can think of offhand are actually not very suited to long-term play anyway; most M-rated games pretty much ramp things up nearly constantly, well into the ridiculous range (and then some), simply because otherwise you lose the impact of what that rating makes available to you.

Maybe. Are you really saying that that happens or will happen with an M or AO rating, but can't happen under a T rating? That you can use the T rating boundaries as "escalation attenuation"?

What would be a good example of a show that did this. I think I can think of one - the new(er) Battlestar Gallactica. That show got so dark, and so depressing, I had to stop watching it. Geez, I am watching the show, the dog is howling, can they really take any more?

-Bodai

Terlin
Terlin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 3 weeks ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 12/06/2012 - 05:00
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

Terlin wrote:
Well, as a writer for the project, I have been told 'point-blank' to stick to the teen-rating, and we have a lengthy guidebook on what that means. That does not mean we will never change our minds, but for the moment we are locked into ESRB-T.
Also, as someone who has spent way too much time with lawyers and defending products from liability lawsuits, you can't knowingly include a feature without being held responsible for it. Its one type of problem if individuals are engaged in 'mature' behavior, but allowing or encouraging it, even in a limited way, raises the level of accountability for the company.
In our case, that's true in both a legal sense and to the community. There is already plenty of controversy over it without bringing that inside the game.
-
Terlin

This is a good point to bring up. But, as the lawyers would tell you, it is not without precedent. Age of Conan is a good example, but there are many more. Those companies felt it was worth the liability risk, and after that it might just be a cost/benefit analysis. I am certainly not saying this feature must be in there, and certainly not at launch.
I would love to see that guidebook you speak of, it would also be useful if COT has an "architect" like section for player-created content.
As a writer, were there or are there topics you wish you could do, but can't because you are restricted by the rules in the guidebook?
It is very interesting how you point out that you were, as you say, told "point-blank" about the rating of the material. That says to me more than anything else here that it is not without merit.
-Bodai

In the context of writing for the project, I would say that I haven't reached any limits that keep me from telling any story worth telling. Of course, we are very much in the early stages of this process.

I'm reminded of the science fiction I read back in the 60's and 70's, and many fantasy novels as well. There was plenty of suspense, grit, violence, romance, and raw emotion set in among them. Many were outstanding works, and they had the power to place me inside the story at a basic level. However, they did it without shoving my face in explicit sex and gore. The implications were strong enough that the reader filled all of that in, if they chose.

So, I expect that we will be able to craft quality stories with just as much depth and grit in the same fashion. Perhaps I'll find an edge I can't step over, but, hopefully, I can find the means to create compelling content without doing so.

Frankly, I find it increasingly challenging to find the same level of quality in many written works these days. I find that with television and film too, but, perhaps, I'm old fashioned. I don't object to strong presentation of topics that require it, but it seems to me that too often sex and graphic violence are included just for their own sake. Its as if the writers and producers of the content didn't have the skill to effectively deliver the story.

For myself, I will keep working to improve my own work, and I'll look to my fellows to lead the way.

Terlin

The Bullpen

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Several years ago, I was at a conference where every academic was clamoring that second life was going to become the "3d web" cnet, dell, and IBM were all creating their own presences there, it was being used for social experiments and simulations... user generated content that can be traded and sold. a real currency exchange. the hype impressed me.

You know, I remember that. And I remember googling until I found a picture or video with an example of the "objectionable" content... and the graphics were so poor you could barely make anything out. I was like, "Really?", this is what they were up in arms about? I also made a mental note *never* to play that game. I am not happy unless I have to call the power plant to start up another generator so I can run my video card.

chase wrote:

I had my first warning before I ever signed in- when I googled it, the top result was an interview between a reporter starting SL and a SL "greeter" on the starter island.One question was "So, explain to me how second life isn't just a rampant pit of cybering"... her response, "It is SO a rancid pit of cybering."
Regardless, I still signed up, At that time, you got to choose your own first name, but had to use a last name from a drop down. I chose "Chase" because I'm terribly unoriginal and then saw a rather scottish-sounding name, so I chose "McCann." Now, when you're going to join an online community known to cater to virtually every deviance, a name that sounds like "Chase my can" wasn't probably the wisest choice.

Heh, do you still play it? I don't think I would last long, or I hope I wouldn't, someone shoot me.

-Bodai

Bodai
Bodai's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 20:50
Terlin wrote:
Terlin wrote:

So, I expect that we will be able to craft quality stories with just as much depth and grit in the same fashion. Perhaps I'll find an edge I can't step over, but, hopefully, I can find the means to create compelling content without doing so.

Well, and when you and your team of writers are doing so, maybe you will think of me and this forum thread, and throw in a few more dead kittens, just for me ;-)

-Bodai

Scott Jackson
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 10 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/20/2013 - 20:13
Oh, I meant "lack of interest

Oh, I meant "lack of interest in designing a system to handle MA content". There was interest in the discussion and very similar proposals as far back as over a year ago, along with quite a bit of pro and con input from the community and dev team at that time, but it never (to my knowledge) coalesced into enough positives to get anyone from within the lore/story effort to champion such a system.

At the time, it was left in basically the same state as Terlin describes it now, though I had left a design doc note that the ability to mod and create non-public content might provide a compromise solution, weaker and more difficult for the player to use than your proposal, without risking the game rating or what some call "family-friendly" aspects. I do not know if that specific compromise remains on the table, or if support for mods in general has stayed in the plans.

Not to knock your effort or vote in any way, I think it still has value...but this topic has some inertia; thus my question on whether the indirect approach I mentioned would work well or poorly at filling the gaps you had in mind.

Darth Fez
Darth Fez's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/20/2013 - 07:53
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

To answer your question #1, what are you looking for here? Is the fact that Age of Conan (rated M) has age controls in place (I know I played it) and they are still in business and I have not seen any significant outcry over if children getting into it evidence enough? What kind of proof would be enough for you?

I thought you were arguing for including mature content in a Teen rated game. It is, of course, a different situation if you are arguing that the game should be rated Mature. I'm fairly certain that the latter is not the case, so this amounts to a straw man argument.

Quote:

Does it mean you make the game rated teen (as planned) and someone sues you anyway because their 10-year-old saw something in the game that game them nightmares? Yes.

Being alarmist isn't going to advance your point, especially since this point has already been addressed:

chase wrote:

For online MMO games, there is an additonal "Interactive Element"
Users Interact - Indicates possible exposure to unfiltered/uncensored user-generated content, including user-to-user communications and media sharing via social media and networks.
"Online Interactions Not Rated by the ESRB" - Warns those who intend to play the game online about possible exposure to chat (text, audio, video) or other types of user-generated content (e.g., maps, skins) that have not been considered in the ESRB rating assignment

- - - - -
Hail Beard!

Support trap clowns for CoT!

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

Lothic wrote:
Gangrel wrote:
Lothic wrote:
Maybe the folks at MWM will be more willing to push the boundaries because they aren't constrained by a huge corporate organization the way Paragon Studios was.

City of Heroes (EU release): 12+ PEGI Rating
City of Villains (EU Release): 16+ PEGI Rating
When they merged the two games together: 16+ PEGI Rating...
I believe that his only happened because City of Villains actually was released as a standalone game, and you never needed to own City of Heroes to play it. Sure it *added* stuff to City of Heroes, but it was an optional purchase. As soon as they merged both of them, City of Heroes *automatically* became 16+.
Or at least, that is how my interpretation of it worked over here in the UK. I could well be wrong, but the PEGI rating of CoH didn't go up until they decided to merge the two games into a single purchase.

Again I understand that CoV was technically "released" as a standalone game and that you did not need to have an active CoH account to play it when it first launched.
But the moment you loaded either CoV (standalone from disc) or the Issue 6 patch of CoH on your computer you had the ENTIRE game there. When I mean the ENTIRE game I mean both CoH and CoV combined. There was never a time when there was ever a seperate CoH client and CoV client. CoV might have appeared like a standalone game from a player account point of view, but it heavily relied on all the code established by CoH because they were in fact really only one game as far as the software was concerned.
Basically the way CoV was released to us was a clever marketing strategy to get people to "rebuy" yet another retail game before they merged everyone's accounts and gave everyone access to both sides. The plan from Day One was to have the two games merged - it wasn't something they only thought of doing after CoV launched. Thus the term "expand-alone".
Obviously the folks in charge of giving games PEGI ratings in the UK were unaware of the overall relationship between CoH and CoV. Had they known what was going on "under the hood" so to speak they would have given CoH a 16+ PEGI rating the day CoV went live because they were always destined to exist as a single united game.
This is why I stopped using the acronym "CoX" many years ago. It may be hard to accept but there was never two games there in the minds of the Devs - it was only CoH from the beginning and there was only ever going to be CoH in the end.

It took them almost 3 years though to get around to merging City of Villains into City of Heroes though (July 2008 according to a quick google search, so I could well be wrong).
You didn't need City of Villains to play the content, and yes, although City of Villains DID add content to "blue side", the same also went the other way, in that owning City of Heroes added content to City of Villains.
I honestly *dont* believe that the PEGI board had the wall pulled over their eyes, though. I believe that they honestly got it correct *at the time of rating*.
Someone with only a City of Heroes account, could *not* access any of the content that warranted the 16+ rating in City of Villains *unless* they also owned City of Villains.
No if's, no buts (ok, barring an account management screw up)
That is how it stood for 2.5/3 years. And only *once* Paragon Studios/NCsoft decided to merge both halves *did* the base game (City of Heroes) get its rating increased.
The same would also stand (I would imagine) if a 18+ Rated expansion was released in the same vein as City of Villains (ie standalone game, also expanded the base game).
If the content is *not* accessible without having your account enabled for it, then the base rating should not be increased.
As soon as the content is available for ALL on a base account, then the game should take on the highest rating possible.

Well I'm not a person involved with handing out PEGI ratings to games (heck I'm not even British) so I really have no idea why they handled it the way they did. Like you say maybe they just concentrated on the artificial separation of player accounts during that period when the game pretended to be two separate standalone games. I'm not suggesting NCsoft intentionally tried to confuse the PEGI people over this - all I'm saying is that they probably did the best they could with a semi-confusing "expand-alone" situation.

Regardless of how that fell out I stand by the reality that by the time CoH Issue 6 and CoV "launched" we were all playing one single united game despite how the player accounts were organized.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Bodai wrote:
Bodai wrote:

Lothic wrote:
Bodai wrote:
Do you not think it is a little selfish to say that this type of material does *not* belong in a game like COH? You find it objectionable, it does not fit your vision of what it should be, therefore there is no place for it? Virtual worlds are basically limitless in size and I think there is room to accommodate all kinds of tastes. And no-one would be forced to go anywhere they don't want to.

Bodai wrote:
You can have your candy-land filled with super-kittens, just don't take away my red light district or demilitarized zone.

Even though PvP in CoH was limited to its own specific areas it was still a matter of constant debate on the CoH forums. It would seem even if you kept the "mature" stuff to its own segregated areas of the game you'd still have constant quibbling over its purpose and/or legitimacy.
As others have mentioned it does appear that the Devs of CoT have a more "shades of grey" mindset so perhaps we may get more mature themes and situations than what you described as "Scooby-Doo" level villainy. I still feel that with good writing and planning there's a lot you can do and explore storywise and still maintain an overall Teen Rated environment. This'll probably have to be the compromise we'll have to accept with this.

So, what you are telling me is that even if there was a "badlands" zone, that popped up a disclaimer warning all who enter what lies beyond (assuming you were old enough to enter at all) as well as an associated forum with similar controls, that you and others simply couldn't help yourselves and would somehow end up there. Or, it's mere existence bothers you to the point you can't tolerate.
In real life, the bad areas of town are not necessarily clearly marked, but it is easy to do in a virtual world. Let's think in three dimensions and take advantage of that.
You lost me on your PvP point, I think I see what you are trying to say, but really it isn't germane. Adult content and PvP have no problem being mutually exclusive. I think your more eluding the the viability of PvP as it was in COX, which is really a separate discussion.
-Bodai

I only brought up PVP to illustrate how long and never-ending a "controversial" topic in a game like this can endure in forum debate. The fact that there's been dozens of posts on this thread since I last commented attests to that.

Much like your "mature area" idea PVP was something that got cordoned off in an attempt to keep it under control and out of sight of people who didn't want to deal with it so mentioning it in that context was in fact germane to the subject at hand. It shows that your "mature area" would hardly exist peacefully in an atmosphere where people are ready to constantly complain about almost anything related to the game. Frankly as much as I'd want a mature area in the game the constant outcry against it would end up being very annoying.

I admire your arguments on this topic and again actually wish something like you suggest could be done. But given that the Rednames have already weighed in on this thread I can only assume you're simply practicing your Devil's Advocacy on a lost cause at this point.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Willow48000
Willow48000's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/08/2013 - 05:16
Haven't read through

Haven't read through everything everyone has said... but got to toss my 2 cents worth.

Very simply, if you set up zones as adult only it will just peek the interest of every teen boy that spots it. (Not sure about the girls, as I was never a teenaged girl.) Set up any sort of age verification system, and they WILL find ways around it. Not to mention the fact that doing so would most likely destroy any chance at a T for Teen rating.

Need a place for more mature role play? Use your base... and be very wary of whom you invite in.

Streaming Classic Rock, Beyond, and Before, 24/7 on Paragon Radio Gallifrey.

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Well I'm not a person involved with handing out PEGI ratings to games (heck I'm not even British) so I really have no idea why they handled it the way they did. Like you say maybe they just concentrated on the artificial separation of player accounts during that period when the game pretended to be two separate standalone games. I'm not suggesting NCsoft intentionally tried to confuse the PEGI people over this - all I'm saying is that they probably did the best they could with a semi-confusing "expand-alone" situation.
Regardless of how that fell out I stand by the reality that by the time CoH Issue 6 and CoV "launched" we were all playing one single united game despite how the player accounts were organized.

The fact that the accounts were separated as they were probably ensured that the PEGI rating for CoH wasn't increased until City of Villains was merged into it.

Anyways, if a game has multiple PEGI/ESRB ratings, which one do you propose retailers should follow when selling the game, and which one should parents follow when buying for their offspring?

As a side note: It is a criminal offence in the UK to sell a PEGI 16+ game to someone under that age, with the penalties being a £5000 grand fine and possible jail time.

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Willow48000 wrote:
Willow48000 wrote:

Haven't read through everything everyone has said... but got to toss my 2 cents worth.
Very simply, if you set up zones as adult only it will just peek the interest of every teen boy that spots it. (Not sure about the girls, as I was never a teenaged girl.) Set up any sort of age verification system, and they WILL find ways around it. Not to mention the fact that doing so would most likely destroy any chance at a T for Teen rating.
Need a place for more mature role play? Use your base... and be very wary of whom you invite in.

Yeah I don't think the concern here is finding private places to have fun with ERP - that's going to happen in this new game regardless.

The main topic at hand here is whether or not villain content is too tame because of the Teen Rating. Making sure the villain content in this new game is "gritty" enough is a valid concern, but I still contend the answer for that lies in better mission writing that legitimately pushes the boundaries of what the Teen Rating will allow as opposed to constructing isolated "Mature Only" areas of the game that will only serve as magnets for unwanted underage curiosity and controversy,

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

Lothic wrote:
Well I'm not a person involved with handing out PEGI ratings to games (heck I'm not even British) so I really have no idea why they handled it the way they did. Like you say maybe they just concentrated on the artificial separation of player accounts during that period when the game pretended to be two separate standalone games. I'm not suggesting NCsoft intentionally tried to confuse the PEGI people over this - all I'm saying is that they probably did the best they could with a semi-confusing "expand-alone" situation.
Regardless of how that fell out I stand by the reality that by the time CoH Issue 6 and CoV "launched" we were all playing one single united game despite how the player accounts were organized.

The fact that the accounts were separated as they were probably ensured that the PEGI rating for CoH wasn't increased until City of Villains was merged into it.
Anyways, if a game has multiple PEGI/ESRB ratings, which one do you propose retailers should follow when selling the game, and which one should parents follow when buying for their offspring?
As a side note: It is a criminal offence in the UK to sell a PEGI 16+ game to someone under that age, with the penalties being a £5000 grand fine and possible jail time.

So what you're saying is that the PEGI ratings were kept as they were to try to keep CoH's 12+ rating as long as possible, Why do you think that is? I suspect the answer is that they knew their sales would crater if they rushed to set the entire game at 16+. That's part of the "clever marketing" I mentioned in my earlier post.

And that's the same problem this game would suffer if you tried to do some kind of hand-wavy split 12+/16+ scenario. Without the relatively clean separation of making different player accounts for the "mature only" content (the way CoH and CoV were initially handled) CoT would have no choice but to be instantly rated PEGI 16+. That's a problem this game simply can't afford to have given the nature of this Kickstarted venture.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Michael Crichton tried to

Michael Crichton tried to demonstrate/dramatize in the novel Jurassic Park that even a "perfect prison" (or zoo, if you prefer) is going to have ways that allow the "inmates" to get out of it. The whole thing is written in a way as to explain parts of how the newly emerging field of Chaos Theory had important implications for things that go beyond just mathematics and understanding how "weather" works.

I look at this idea that you can just "wall off" any sort of Mature Content into its own zone, and have it stay there, as fundamentally flawed at its core as the notion that you could have a "Jurassic Park" and never have the dinosaurs get out of their "cages" and overrun the place (and then possibly even escape off the island to reach the mainland of the Outside World). In short, I view the notion that an attitude of "What Happens In Vegas, STAYS IN Vegas" to be almost hopelessly naive, to the point of approaching willful blindness when it comes to the belief that Adult Content can just be "walled off" and kept "hidden away" in its own Zone without leaking out to taint the rest of the game (like ink drops spilled into water). AT BEST, doing that would amount to a delaying tactic for slowing the rate of "transmission" of what can be found and done in the Adult Zone, but it isn't going to stop it. There are just simply too many vectors for word of the content of that Zone to "get out" into the general population and community at large.

In short, I look at the idea of a Adult Only Zone to be an inherently "leaky" one, where the question is less a matter of IF but more a matter of WHEN the "containment" around the Zone's contents would, in effect, FAIL to contain its contents ... with all the attendant ramifications and repercussions that implies (and promises).

Quote:

Joshua: "Greetings Professor Faulken. Strange game. The winning move is not to play."


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Gangrel wrote:
Lothic wrote:
Well I'm not a person involved with handing out PEGI ratings to games (heck I'm not even British) so I really have no idea why they handled it the way they did. Like you say maybe they just concentrated on the artificial separation of player accounts during that period when the game pretended to be two separate standalone games. I'm not suggesting NCsoft intentionally tried to confuse the PEGI people over this - all I'm saying is that they probably did the best they could with a semi-confusing "expand-alone" situation.
Regardless of how that fell out I stand by the reality that by the time CoH Issue 6 and CoV "launched" we were all playing one single united game despite how the player accounts were organized.

The fact that the accounts were separated as they were probably ensured that the PEGI rating for CoH wasn't increased until City of Villains was merged into it.
Anyways, if a game has multiple PEGI/ESRB ratings, which one do you propose retailers should follow when selling the game, and which one should parents follow when buying for their offspring?
As a side note: It is a criminal offence in the UK to sell a PEGI 16+ game to someone under that age, with the penalties being a £5000 grand fine and possible jail time.

So what you're saying is that the PEGI ratings were kept as they were to try to keep CoH's 12+ rating as long as possible, Why do you think that is? I suspect the answer is that they knew their sales would crater if they rushed to set the entire game at 16+. That's part of the "clever marketing" I mentioned in my earlier post.
And that's the same problem this game would suffer if you tried to do some kind of hand-wavy split 12+/16+ scenario. Without the relatively clean separation of making different player accounts for the "mature only" content (the way CoH and CoV were initially handled) CoT would have no choice but to be instantly rated PEGI 16+. That's a problem this game simply can't afford to have given the nature of this Kickstarted venture.

Clever marketing? Possibly.

But then again, why try to be clever about it when the easiest thing to assume is more than likely correct (that because you *couldn't* access the content without actually *owning* City of Villains, the PEGI rating for City of Heroes was unaffected).

It was when they removed that limitation in 2008, that the PEGI rating was upgraded.

It is also only since 30th July 2012 that the PEGI rating was legally enforceable (coincidentally close to the shutdown announcement... *warning* common sense tingling....).

Anyways: Here is the blurb about the PEGI 12 rating:

Quote:

Videogames that show violence of a slightly more graphic nature towards fantasy character and/or non graphic violence towards human-looking characters or recognisable animals, as well as videogames that show nudity of a slightly more graphic nature would fall in this age category. Any bad language in this category must be mild and fall short of sexual expletives.

PEGI 16 rating:

Quote:

This rating is applied once the depiction of violence (or sexual activity) reaches a stage that looks the same as would be expected in real life. More extreme bad language, the concept of the use of tobacco and drugs and the depiction of criminal activities can be content of games that are rated 16.

Now, before the release of CoV, was the content of CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

AFTER the release of CoV, was the content of the base CoH game more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

Once they merged the two together (so that you no longer had to purchase CoV separately), was the rating for CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

Lothic wrote:
So what you're saying is that the PEGI ratings were kept as they were to try to keep CoH's 12+ rating as long as possible, Why do you think that is? I suspect the answer is that they knew their sales would crater if they rushed to set the entire game at 16+. That's part of the "clever marketing" I mentioned in my earlier post.
And that's the same problem this game would suffer if you tried to do some kind of hand-wavy split 12+/16+ scenario. Without the relatively clean separation of making different player accounts for the "mature only" content (the way CoH and CoV were initially handled) CoT would have no choice but to be instantly rated PEGI 16+. That's a problem this game simply can't afford to have given the nature of this Kickstarted venture.

Clever marketing? Possibly.
But then again, why try to be clever about it when the easiest thing to assume is more than likely correct (that because you *couldn't* access the content without actually *owning* City of Villains, the PEGI rating for City of Heroes was unaffected).

So here's the key difference between the CoH/CoV situation and what would likely happen to CoT: If we accept that the reason CoH was nominally able to keep its 12+ rating after the CoV content was merged into it was because the two "games" maintained a separate player account system then how is CoT going to be able to justify a "Mature Only" section without an equally arbitrary scheme for handling two separate types of accounts to control the access?

It would seem that the only way you could keep CoT from instantly being rated 16+ would be for it to adopt two completely isolated account systems that would in effect make it appear to the world like two "standalone" games the way CoH and CoV were initially presented. Since I highly doubt the CoT folks want to go through the hassle of trying to market what they're making as two standalone games just for the purposes of "pretending" that part of it is 12+ rated I just don't see how anything of the kind is going to happen.

Gangrel wrote:

Anyways: Here is the blurb about the PEGI 12 rating:
Quote:
Videogames that show violence of a slightly more graphic nature towards fantasy character and/or non graphic violence towards human-looking characters or recognisable animals, as well as videogames that show nudity of a slightly more graphic nature would fall in this age category. Any bad language in this category must be mild and fall short of sexual expletives.
PEGI 16 rating:
Quote:
This rating is applied once the depiction of violence (or sexual activity) reaches a stage that looks the same as would be expected in real life. More extreme bad language, the concept of the use of tobacco and drugs and the depiction of criminal activities can be content of games that are rated 16.
Now, before the release of CoV, was the content of CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
AFTER the release of CoV, was the content of the base CoH game more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
Once they merged the two together (so that you no longer had to purchase CoV separately), was the rating for CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

I'm not really going to muse over the details of the historical progression of CoH's PEGI rating. There are countless examples of ratings boards handing out ratings which are controversial and/or mismatched in all sorts of ways. I still contend that CoH's rating probably should have instantly gone up to 16+ as soon as CoV content was attached to the game regardless of being compartmentalized by a separate accounting system especially considering the merger of CoH and CoV into a single unified standalone game was always the goal from the very beginning. But of course like I pointed out earlier I have nothing to do with how PEGI ratings are granted. *shrugs*

Bottomline I think there would be very few ways you could convince the current PEGI people that CoT is somehow "legitimately" part 12+ and part 16+ without going through with some fairly draconian measures that are likely never going to happen.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

(snip)
Quote:
This rating is applied once the depiction of violence (or sexual activity) reaches a stage that looks the same as would be expected in real life. More extreme bad language, the concept of the use of tobacco and drugs and the depiction of criminal activities can be content of games that are rated 16.
Now, before the release of CoV, was the content of CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
AFTER the release of CoV, was the content of the base CoH game more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
Once they merged the two together (so that you no longer had to purchase CoV separately), was the rating for CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

I have heard that there is a bias based on the "role" of the player in the application of some of the rating systems.

Take a game that has "police officers being shot."

If you're the hero in the game trying to apprehend the bad guy that killed the police, your game will often be rated differently than if you assume the role of the villain that killed the police... or given the choice to do either. They could be otherwise identical, but whether the player is permitted to be the actor or not would play some role in the rating weighing depending on the rating board used.

Similarly, presentation matters. You can have the same storyline, but move some unseemly elements to "off camera actions" that are alluded to and only get a "suggestive themes" (ESRB T) rather than a short on-camera moment that warrants "sexual content" ("M").

Gangrel
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/15/2013 - 15:14
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

Gangrel wrote:
(snip)
Quote:
This rating is applied once the depiction of violence (or sexual activity) reaches a stage that looks the same as would be expected in real life. More extreme bad language, the concept of the use of tobacco and drugs and the depiction of criminal activities can be content of games that are rated 16.

Now, before the release of CoV, was the content of CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
AFTER the release of CoV, was the content of the base CoH game more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
Once they merged the two together (so that you no longer had to purchase CoV separately), was the rating for CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

I have heard that there is a bias based on the "role" of the player in the application of some of the rating systems.
Take a game that has "police officers being shot."
If you're the hero in the game trying to apprehend the bad guy that killed the police, your game will often be rated differently than if you assume the role of the villain that killed the police... or given the choice to do either. They could be otherwise identical, but whether the player is permitted to be the actor or not would play some role in the rating weighing depending on the rating board used.
Similarly, presentation matters. You can have the same storyline, but move some unseemly elements to "off camera actions" that are alluded to and only get a "suggestive themes" (ESRB T) rather than a short on-camera moment that warrants "sexual content" ("M").

Presentation is indeed important for this.

I have just found my box for the Good Vs Evil packaging of the game (released in 2007 according to the EU box I have)

It is PEGI rated 16. No surprise there, because the game has to show the rating that would cover *both* games. Not to mention as well that the Good Vs Evil box set actually gave you access to both sides of the game.

Quote:

1) I reject your reality.... and substitute my own
2) Not to be used when upset... will void warranty
3) Stoke me a clipper i will be back for dinner
4) I have seen more intelligence from an NPC AI in TR beta, than from most MMO players.

Cold_Iron
Cold_Iron's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
kickstarter
Joined: 10/18/2013 - 21:53
Might as well throw in my two

Might as well throw in my two cents. I agree 100% with the squirrel girl quote I don't want the dark and gritty world of modern comics. In my opinion super hero comic have gone down hill and lost there original purpose, to inspire hope and the belief that justice will prevail justice. This is why shonen manga has had such a rise in the last 13 years or so Kids and teens are drawn to the light heated and inspirational adventures of character like Naruto, Kenshin, and Luffy. Now you can delve into some darker things and still be able to pull off a teen taring I just don't think that making it more "Mature" is needed. In fact most of the time I see what people call mature as childish because once the 13 year olds see it they think they look older by copying it sort of like in the 90s sitcoms when girls put on makeup for the first time. The best balance of dark and light I've found in arkham city. You get psychoses of all types but its still done with tact and class. Also what do you get by having nudity and criminals killing people in a gruesome manner? I cant think of anything that is improved by it.

Coming from the villeins side you have to figure that who are the more memorable villeins and what are there goals? The more gruesome and sadistic fall by the wayside because they are real. The ones who stand out are the ones who go beyond that. All villeins want the same triad of things Money, Power, and and personal goal. One always leads to another but how they go about it is what makes them stand out. Dr.Freeze is driven by love for his wife Nora. He uses his crio-tech to steal money to find a cure for her. He has no minions (outside that one movie) because even though he is powerful and could easily make more freeze guns he cares only for saving his wife and occasionally getting revenge on the world for because of his need for subzero temperatures to survive. The joker on the other hand is a complete anarchist doing whatever he wants for no known reason. He wants money and power but most of all he is driven by a thirst for attention. One of the reasons for his joker gas is simply to make sure that people know it was him that did it. No one cares how deadly or gruesome they are but when there is a robbery you know who did it. Anybody can disembowel a cop and hang it from the chandler but only the Joker leaves a bank with his face on his victims. As such random mature content is unneeded. You want to be a bad guy with blood, gore, nudity, and super powers? go play the new saints row. There is no place for it here.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gangrel wrote:
Gangrel wrote:

chase wrote:
Gangrel wrote:
(snip)
Quote:
This rating is applied once the depiction of violence (or sexual activity) reaches a stage that looks the same as would be expected in real life. More extreme bad language, the concept of the use of tobacco and drugs and the depiction of criminal activities can be content of games that are rated 16.

Now, before the release of CoV, was the content of CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
AFTER the release of CoV, was the content of the base CoH game more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?
Once they merged the two together (so that you no longer had to purchase CoV separately), was the rating for CoH more suitable for the PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating?

I have heard that there is a bias based on the "role" of the player in the application of some of the rating systems.
Take a game that has "police officers being shot."
If you're the hero in the game trying to apprehend the bad guy that killed the police, your game will often be rated differently than if you assume the role of the villain that killed the police... or given the choice to do either. They could be otherwise identical, but whether the player is permitted to be the actor or not would play some role in the rating weighing depending on the rating board used.
Similarly, presentation matters. You can have the same storyline, but move some unseemly elements to "off camera actions" that are alluded to and only get a "suggestive themes" (ESRB T) rather than a short on-camera moment that warrants "sexual content" ("M").

Presentation is indeed important for this.
I have just found my box for the Good Vs Evil packaging of the game (released in 2007 according to the EU box I have)
It is PEGI rated 16. No surprise there, because the game has to show the rating that would cover *both* games. Not to mention as well that the Good Vs Evil box set actually gave you access to both sides of the game.

So again in light of what we're specifically talking about here for CoT I could only assume that a ratings board like PEGI would judge it in the harshest of terms even if it tried to maintain otherwise "non-mature" areas of the game. CoT would get a 16+ (or worse if there is something worse) in the blink of an eye.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Pages