Nakedness in Skyrim

[Lachdonin]

There's nudity in the Witcher and I don't remember any tabloid witch hunts, pun intended.

For me the simple question is immersion. Some characters should be naked. Some shouldn't. People should ABSOLUTELY not sleep in the clothes they wore all day., that well annoys me.

 

Nudity is not necessarily sexy.

I don't know about America, but in England, say a sex education show, or a Breast cancer segment in a hospital show can display female nipples before water shed, like 7:30pm. Sex and such shenanigans are WAY too much of a current sales and moral hurdle for a game as massive as Skyrim to surmount, but nudity, the simple human body shouldn't be.

 

 

Admitedly, the western world, particularly America, is almost cripplingly sexually repressed. Suddenly, if someone trips and flashes a nipple its a scandal. Its absolute bull, and a product of the same bible thumpers who cause problems every time a game comes out and pushes the limit. We've had nudity and sex in movies for decades, but we get one sex scene in a game (One which takes hours to acheive, and will be missed if you skip a line of dialogue... IE takes more work than actually getting laid) and everyone's in an uproar...

 

Still, given the period, your statements are incorrect. It was not only common, but normal for people to wear the same clothes, day in and day out, to sleep, eat, work, and fight in those clothes. The only time you'd expect to take them off would be for sex, and your once a year bath. Unless you were wealthy, of course, in which case you'd have more than one outfit...

 

At the same time, underwear didn't exist in the same period. I mean, it just didn't exist. No one had thought of it. Everyone hung free and loose. In fact, more often than not, no one wore pants, and instead wore various robes, skirts, kilts and so forth.

 

For the sake of realism, i agree, but that realism isn't worth the hassel of going through the censors, especially with a high profile game, when the community can do it themselves and skirt around the system.

[Pineapplerum]

No. Why?

If nudity means that much to someone than they should by the pc version of the game and mod the nudity into the game.

I'm not against nudity and the game has a Mature rating, so I'm not concerned with kids seeing a woman's boobies. I would think the gore and killing would be more worrisome to parents if

they cared that much.

But no, just simply because it's not necessary. I agree with you on the if Bethesda did it than it would be more realistic and all the women wouldn't look like playboy models..I don't think you see too many mod versions of nude bodies where the woman's body is realistic. I don't think I've seen any nude mods where the woman had a little stomach, let alone a woman carrying some extra luggage. I find most the modded versions, the women are way too skinny and although I'm skinny myself, I don't understand why a woman can't have a little stomach or chubby legs.

And like said, the media would blow it out of proportion and turn it into a bigger deal than needed and Bethesda would have to respond to protect themselves.

Edited November 22, 2011 by Pineapplerum

[Lachdonin]

For those who preach about realism... would you be willing to download/make a mod where, just as sliding the complexion bar ages your characters features, it would also add 'sag'?

[Kendo 2]

Still, given the period, your statements are incorrect. It was not only common, but normal for people to wear the same clothes, day in and day out, to sleep, eat, work, and fight in those clothes. The only time you'd expect to take them off would be for sex, and your once a year bath. Unless you were wealthy, of course, in which case you'd have more than one outfit...

 

At the same time, underwear didn't exist in the same period. I mean, it just didn't exist. No one had thought of it. Everyone hung free and loose. In fact, more often than not, no one wore pants, and instead wore various robes, skirts, kilts and so forth.

 

That's just bad history lessons. People in the low Middle Ages did bathe and they bathed frequently. That was a hold over from the Roman era. People stopped bathing during the 1300's due to the expense of firewood because of the Little Ice Age of the period. Only the very wealthy could afford wood and that is also why there were laws in England about cutting green wood, collecting deadfalls and the dreaded 'stumpage fees' of feudal lords.

Linen underwear was common too. Men wore long shorts (braes) and women wore long underskirts. Both sexes wore at type of vest (chemise in France, shift in England) that was pulled over the top of the head and then tied into place. People who could afford it wore silk versions. The 'bikini' thing in Skyrim is an anachronism.

[Lachdonin]

That's just bad history lessons. People in the low Middle Ages did bathe and they bathed frequently. That was a hold over from the Roman era. People stopped bathing during the 1300's due to the expense of firewood because of the Little Ice Age of the period. Only the very wealthy could afford wood and that is also why there were laws in England about cutting green wood, collecting deadfalls and the dreaded 'stumpage fees' of feudal lords.

 

Frequently? Really? Where did you get that figure? From about 900ce to about 1200ce, the height of the middle ages (the Dark Ages being the period just after the fall of the Roman Empire, streaching from about 500ce to 800/900ce) was characterised by a borderline religious ban on bathing, due to the social perception of the 'Bath house orgy'. Of course, its a horrid missrepresentation of Roman bath houses, but what didn't the early Catholic Church missrepresent? Anyway, for centuries bathing was considered 'evil' and 'sinful' to the point where a good chunk of the aristocracy, who were regarded as the 'cleanest' of people, would be proud if they took two baths a year. To compensate, Rose Water became far more common, and perfumes and spices from the east became increasingly popular to cover up the smell. The irony, of course, is that this aversion to bathing is part of what reopened the trade lines with the east whcih had fallen with Rome, thus driving the slow crawl out of the Dark Ages and into the Enlightenment period of the 1200-1400's.

 

Thats not to say people didn't swim, which does contribute somewhat to cleanliness, but thats another issue.

 

As for the underwear thing, i would be surprised if i'm alone in my possition that a skirt, undershirt (Shift) and the like does not constitute 'underwear' anymore than wearing a shirt under my jacket does. What we consider underwear, in the modern sense, did not exist until the latter part of the 1700's. Still, the presence of liner-garments does not invalidate the point that, except for amorous sortee's and bathing, it would be unlikely to see anyone naked during the cultural period.

 

Even then, of everything i've seen in Skyrim, i can only think of a single situation where you MAY see a person naked in context are those bathers in the Hotsprines NE of Iverstead.

[LadyMilla]

History lessons are interesting but Tamriel is not Earth. No matter what analogies you find between the society, culture, fauna and flora of Tamriel and Earth, it is still a fantasy world where historical (and here, "historical" refers to our history on Earth) references should not be taken as a gospel. If you want to rationalize that your Nord gal has Frost Resistance, and comes from a tribe that holds to the belief that wearing armor is a sign of cowardice and weakness, and for this reason they keep body surface covered by clothing to a bare minimum then be my guest.

[Lachdonin]

My initial point was to use real-world analogies to counter a complaint based on a real-world 'explination'. Namely that no one would want to sleep in the same clothes they wore throughout the day. The point, of course, is that if you apply socially contextual, real world analogy to the TES universe, then things like nudity don't make much sense.

 

Likewise, from a designer standpoint, there is too much potential hassel for the game maker to include nudity as standard, particularly for high profile games. Some games, like God of War, seem to get away with if by taking a strong "NOT FOR KIDS" approach, and others like The Witcher are so low profile no one notices, but for the most part it's not worth the headache and outcry.

 

Asside from a small portion of the community (Though seemingly almost 2/3rds of the people on here) seem to think its a good idea, despite all the rational arguements against it. And still, theres really no rational explination in support of it. Its all "Well, we're gonna do it anyway, so why not?" We're all gonna die anyway, so why don't we go jumpping off bridges? Because just because its going to happen doesn't mean its a good idea to hurry it along.

[LadyMilla]

My initial point was to use real-world analogies to counter a complaint based on a real-world 'explination'. Namely that no one would want to sleep in the same clothes they wore throughout the day. The point, of course, is that if you apply socially contextual, real world analogy to the TES universe, then things like nudity don't make much sense.

 

Likewise, from a designer standpoint, there is too much potential hassel for the game maker to include nudity as standard, particularly for high profile games. Some games, like God of War, seem to get away with if by taking a strong "NOT FOR KIDS" approach, and others like The Witcher are so low profile no one notices, but for the most part it's not worth the headache and outcry.

 

Asside from a small portion of the community (Though seemingly almost 2/3rds of the people on here) seem to think its a good idea, despite all the rational arguements against it. And still, theres really no rational explination in support of it. Its all "Well, we're gonna do it anyway, so why not?" We're all gonna die anyway, so why don't we go jumpping off bridges? Because just because its going to happen doesn't mean its a good idea to hurry it along.

 

The only rational argument against it is that it may go against certain puritanical laws and beliefs. All other arguments are either subjective or based on selectively picked analogies. Skyrim is rated 'Mature' anyway. If our societies were not so hypocritical in that chopped heads and flying bloody intestines and body parts are fine and seldom lambasted by the media, but naked or almost naked bodies are abhorrent, there would be nothing to argue about at all.

[Lachdonin]

Ok, and what is the rational arguement in favor of it?

 

Our culture IS hipocritical. Stock nudity in a high profile game WILL cause controversy. Companies like Bethesda want to AVOID controversy. Hence, the most rational choice is not to include nudity. Its rather simple, and i still have yet to hear a rational counter.

[LadyMilla]

Ok, and what is the rational arguement in favor of it?

 

Our culture IS hipocritical. Stock nudity in a high profile game WILL cause controversy. Companies like Bethesda want to AVOID controversy. Hence, the most rational choice is not to include nudity. Its rather simple, and i still have yet to hear a rational counter.

 

There is hardly any need for a rational counter if the only rational anti-nudity argument is based on a fact that is irrational itself. Let's face it, our social hypocrisy is a fact and it is irrational. It is a product of a long social development process, that's a fact but that does not make it any more rational. I would point out what historical factors should be blamed for such a hypocritical attitude, but that sort of debate is discouraged here. The more companies try to break down those barriers, the better.

 

Anyway, the puritanical strongholds are slowly crumbling. BioWare added hetero/homo-erotic scenes (no nudity, though, but that was easily modded into them) to Mass Effect and Dragon Age and those games were major hits so avoiding controversy is no longer a completely valid excuse, especially for a game that is rated M anyway.