Why does Bethesda still not add nudity in games?

[InuyashaFE]

There's no point in looking down and seeing your legs in a game.

 

Agreed.

 

There's no point in having better graphics.

 

Except that you're looking at those all the time, not for just two seconds.

 

There's no point in having music.

 

You're listening to that all the time unless you keep your games silent, so it has a point.

 

There's no point in having a higher resolution monitor

 

Actually it does, it makes the game look better. 100% of the time.

 

There's no point to have story in games.

 

Affects the gameplay constantly, instead of just for two seconds.

 

Those things don't affect gameplay at all, so there's obviously no real reason to have them.

 

Except that they do. Constantly. Not for 2 seconds before you move onto the next body. This argument is like saying Balgruuf should have black hair instead of blonde, it's such a minute difference that it's pointless.

 

See how that works?

 

No, I don't, because you're not really using a lot of logic here.

Edited June 17, 2012 by InuyashaFE

[Rennn]

There's no point in looking down and seeing your legs in a game.

 

Agreed.

 

There's no point in having better graphics.

 

Except that you're looking at those all the time, not for just two seconds.

 

There's no point in having music.

 

You're listening to that all the time unless you keep your games silent, so it has a point.

 

There's no point in having a higher resolution monitor

 

Actually it does, it makes the game look better. 100% of the time.

 

There's no point to have story in games.

 

Affects the gameplay constantly, instead of just for two seconds.

 

Those things don't affect gameplay at all, so there's obviously no real reason to have them.

 

Except that they do. Constantly. Not for 2 seconds before you move onto the next body. This argument is like saying Balgruuf should have black hair instead of blonde, it's such a minute difference that it's pointless.

 

See how that works?

 

No, I don't, because you're not really using a lot of logic here.

 

Ah, but you've proven my point. You've explained perfectly how graphics and story affect gameplay. Realistic nudity where it makes sense in games has the same impact that story does, for it's a part of story. It has the same impact that graphics have, for it's a part of graphics. Thus it has a very large point. Even if it makes no difference to you, it makes a diffierence to many people and to say otherwise implies that you don't think others can have opinions. For this reason, as it is the realistic course, there should be nudity in games.

 

I'm done here, this is going to turn into a flame war in a few more hours. That's what happens when societal bias becomes involved in arguments.

Edited June 17, 2012 by Rennn

[Stemin]

Ah, but you've proven my point. You've explained perfectly how graphics and story affect gameplay. Realistic nudity where it makes sense in games has the same impact that story does, for it's a part of story. It has the same impact that graphics have, for it's a part of graphics.

 

There's no point in Skyrim where nudity would add or be part of the story, nor does it have an impact. They would have to specifically add parts to the game for the expressed purpose of making a nude scene, otherwise all you're doing is seeing nude bandits lying around, which is pointless and again would lose them customers.

[InuyashaFE]

There's no point in looking down and seeing your legs in a game.

 

Agreed.

 

There's no point in having better graphics.

 

Except that you're looking at those all the time, not for just two seconds.

 

There's no point in having music.

 

You're listening to that all the time unless you keep your games silent, so it has a point.

 

There's no point in having a higher resolution monitor

 

Actually it does, it makes the game look better. 100% of the time.

 

There's no point to have story in games.

 

Affects the gameplay constantly, instead of just for two seconds.

 

Those things don't affect gameplay at all, so there's obviously no real reason to have them.

 

Except that they do. Constantly. Not for 2 seconds before you move onto the next body. This argument is like saying Balgruuf should have black hair instead of blonde, it's such a minute difference that it's pointless.

 

See how that works?

 

No, I don't, because you're not really using a lot of logic here.

 

Ah, but you've proven my point. You've explained perfectly how graphics and story affect gameplay. Realistic nudity where it makes sense in games has the same impact that story does, for it's a part of story. It has the same impact that graphics have, for it's a part of graphics. Thus it has a very large point. Even if it makes no difference to you, it makes a diffierence to many people and to say otherwise implies that you don't think others can have opinions. For this reason, as it is the realistic course, there should be nudity in games.

 

I'm done here, this is going to turn into a flame war in a few more hours. That's what happens when societal bias becomes involved in arguments.

 

1. I'm confused. You're saying that because you think I'm saying you can't have an opinion, there should be nudity?

 

2. And you're also saying that because I think nudity makes no difference, I'm oppressing other opinions... By having an opinion?

 

Anyway, now you're oppressing my opinion by writing it up as 'societal bias' and using that to make it seem as if your opinion is somehow more justified than mine.

[Gyiul]

Why suffer the ERSB blow when you can just have the nude mod community handle it?

 

Also they used to have nude models in Daggerfall or something if you didn't have anything equipped.

 

Well I thought the ESRB is lax on nudity these days which they include it on M rated games as long there is no explicit sexual material I believe.

 

Of course once again, although there is already nude mods but I haven't seen anyone making nude monsters from Daggerfall however (like the Nympths, Lamia, Medusa, etc) which is my main point. Of course if it's not possible to make new monsters from scratch which is something only Bethesda can only do (since they have the source code) then this is the reason why they should have nudity in their future games.

Edited June 17, 2012 by Gyiul

[kingdeath]

So here's the thing, you got graphic be-headings, they don't pull away from it ether, does it need to be in the game ...... HELL NO (It could be implied) and that kinda disturbed me showing me a defenseless man bound and getting his head hacked off(don't go and use "well that's what use to happen in those days because they did not have underwear in those day ether)

and it kinda pisses me off that it's O.K. to go to that length and that extreme and people have no problem, but get pissy when you show boobies or mention it should be in the game . if your going to say "there going for realism" then go for it all. "It's a war game and no need for nudity"....... Ammmm you do know that they use nudity for shaming and punishment and lets not forget it's also used for gathering lintel from you enemy's from the spying game and assassins use it too, to get close to there target and kill them after they sleep with them (not a bad way to go mind you) /////////// long story short Graphic Be-headings of bound and defenseless men O.K. showing a naked body ah no lol. Now I don't mind be-headings in a story and not just implied as long you do the same to every thing including nudity....

Edited June 17, 2012 by kingdeath

[InuyashaFE]

So here's the thing, you got graphic be-headings, they don't pull away from it ether, does it need to be in the game ...... HELL NO (It could be implied) and that kinda disturbed me showing me a defenseless man bound and getting his head hacked off(don't go and use "well that's what use to happen in those days because they did not have underwear in those day ether)

and it kinda pisses me off that it's O.K. to go to that length and that extreme and people have no problem, but get pissy when you show boobies or mention it should be in the game . if your going to say "there going for realism" then go for it all. "It's a war game and no need for nudity"....... Ammmm you do know that they use nudity for shaming and punishment and lets not forget it's also used for gathering lintel from you enemy's from the spying game and assassins use it too, to get close to there target and kill them after they sleep with them (not a bad way to go mind you) /////////// long story short Graphic Be-headings of bound and defenseless men O.K. showing a naked body ah no lol. Now I don't mind be-headings in a story and not just implied as long you do the same to every thing including nudity....

 

This is why you have mods, so the people who want to 'use nudity for shaming and punishment' can get their fix. :P

 

EDIT: I will say, though, that it's funny people say that they don't want nudity for sex and yet their prime argument for nudity is that it represents shaming and punishment of their enemies. That sounds a bit... Sexual, don't you think?

Edited June 17, 2012 by InuyashaFE

[AxlRocks]

If Beth ever added nudity into the games, I'd be severely disappointed and would indeed anxiously await a mod for covering NPC's up. I see many who use it for realism and that's fine if you feel that enhances something, but I personally could not care less. I don't want something that is unrealistic to the lore, like 9mm's or cars, but beyond that, realism doesn't matter to me. I do use some immersive mods, but mostly, I'm immersed in the game simply because it's fun. I don't need nude people in it to feel like I'm playing a fun game. I slay dragons, I kill bandits, etc. That's the fun in it for me. Doing something I can't in real life. I don't plan on killing some beat up, ugly criminal and stripping them in real life so I can sell their cotton shirt and denim jeans for 10 Septims, and, as real life is, you know, realistic, see their nude body. Therefore, I don't care about it in the game either. Yeah, it's an over the top example but you get my point, I don't feel I need to mod everything just to make it just like real life. I want to play a game, not Life Simulation Scrolls V.

[Seviraph]

So here's the thing, you got graphic be-headings, they don't pull away from it ether, does it need to be in the game ...... HELL NO (It could be implied) and that kinda disturbed me showing me a defenseless man bound and getting his head hacked off(don't go and use "well that's what use to happen in those days because they did not have underwear in those day ether)

and it kinda pisses me off that it's O.K. to go to that length and that extreme and people have no problem, but get pissy when you show boobies or mention it should be in the game . if your going to say "there going for realism" then go for it all. "It's a war game and no need for nudity"....... Ammmm you do know that they use nudity for shaming and punishment and lets not forget it's also used for gathering lintel from you enemy's from the spying game and assassins use it too, to get close to there target and kill them after they sleep with them (not a bad way to go mind you) /////////// long story short Graphic Be-headings of bound and defenseless men O.K. showing a naked body ah no lol. Now I don't mind be-headings in a story and not just implied as long you do the same to every thing including nudity....

 

This is why you have mods, so the people who want to 'use nudity for shaming and punishment' can get their fix. :P

 

EDIT: I will say, though, that it's funny people say that they don't want nudity for sex and yet their prime argument for nudity is that it represents shaming and punishment of their enemies. That sounds a bit... Sexual, don't you think?

 

not to mention it seems alittle.. twisted

 

see in the game, there's no quest that revolves around nudity or the shame of nudity, or sex

there is a lot of things that involve violence, so that really shouldn't be used to compare to nudity

even the main quest is about Defeating Alduin, which obviously isn't a diplomatic thing (though that would be interesting if they could pull it off)

 

and again realism is not the best word to use on Skyrim

Edited June 17, 2012 by Seviraph

[ginnyfizz]

So here's the thing, you got graphic be-headings, they don't pull away from it ether, does it need to be in the game ...... HELL NO (It could be implied) and that kinda disturbed me showing me a defenseless man bound and getting his head hacked off(don't go and use "well that's what use to happen in those days because they did not have underwear in those day ether)

and it kinda pisses me off that it's O.K. to go to that length and that extreme and people have no problem, but get pissy when you show boobies or mention it should be in the game . if your going to say "there going for realism" then go for it all. "It's a war game and no need for nudity"....... Ammmm you do know that they use nudity for shaming and punishment and lets not forget it's also used for gathering lintel from you enemy's from the spying game and assassins use it too, to get close to there target and kill them after they sleep with them (not a bad way to go mind you) /////////// long story short Graphic Be-headings of bound and defenseless men O.K. showing a naked body ah no lol. Now I don't mind be-headings in a story and not just implied as long you do the same to every thing including nudity....

 

This is why you have mods, so the people who want to 'use nudity for shaming and punishment' can get their fix. :P

 

EDIT: I will say, though, that it's funny people say that they don't want nudity for sex and yet their prime argument for nudity is that it represents shaming and punishment of their enemies. That sounds a bit... Sexual, don't you think?

 

No, you are missing the point. Historically, nudity WAS most definitely part of the ritual humiliation of both dead enemies on the battlefield and of certain types of execution. Harold Godwinsson, sometime King of England, and who may or may not have taken an arrow to the eye, but was certainly killed at the Battle of Senlac (Hastings) was so treated by William of Normandy's men, in fact was so badly mangled that he could only be identified by his mistress because of certain tattoos or marks on his body that only she had seen before.

 

Men who were crucified by the Romans would be crucified naked, the death was meant to be a shaming and humiliating one and it had nothing to do with being sexual, it was the fact that before the protracted death (it could take days sometimes) happened the victim would be forced to soil themselves, etc, in public, as well as being in agony, bleeding,moaning,thirsty and starving. Even the most famous person to die that way has now been portrayed naked in at least one place that I have visited.

 

In England, male traitors not of noble blood at one time were dragged to the scaffold on a hurdle, hung until half dead, and then cut down. They would then be stripped naked and flung down on a butchers block so that they could be castrated, eviscerated and their bowels burnt before their face, and then beheaded and quartered, the (still naked) bits being distributed around the city.

 

Noble traitors of both sexes, after beheading, would be stripped of their valuable clothes and often left to lie around naked or almost naked for hours (the tragic Lady Jane Grey, for example) until someone thought to bury them. Hanged persons were often stripped, dipped in pitch and gibbeted after death.

 

Like it or not, that is historical fact. Times were brutal and executions were attended by jeering crowds of thousands. It has NOTHING to do with being sexual - I know my history and this is how it was. It is disgraceful to impute sexual motives to people when they cite historical accuracy and the fact that nakedness was used as part of the disgrace and shame of punishment.