this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
189 points (98.5% liked)

PC Gaming

13943 readers
337 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 81 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

Sims type games have always had that kind of appeal to be able to go full sociopath in a harmless way. Drowning Sims in pools is a classic of gaming. The devs can do what they want with their game, but (unless this was something they had to do for publishing reasons) it strikes me as strange that they apologized for players being able to hit kids with cars in game, or abusing interactions to kidnap NPCs.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 21 points 10 months ago (1 children)

A) the game's rating would skyrocket as it'd almost universally get upgraded to an AO rating or equivalent (not sure if that's actually something they care about though)

B) while not technically illegal afaik, there are a number of countries that would almost certainly ban the game if it showed children being killed. My understanding is that's why child deaths occasionally show up in movies and TV, but tend to be avoided like the plague in video games.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I understanding removing the ability for publishing reasons. It is the apparently mandatory apology which I find a bit humorous and pointless. "We're sorry because of unforeseen player actions which were obviously not an intended part of design."

Perhaps I'm just so deadened to the hollow "We will do better." apologies belted out by companies and public personalities, where the apology reads the same regardless of the amount of actual fault.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Because to the black and white people out there it's bad that a child can come to any amount of harm no matter how fictional those children may be. It's a similar trend to the old anti-game movement because these people believe the sort of person who picks up a digital AK47 and clip dumps some NPCs is the sort of person who would do the same in real life and thus shouldn't be able to in any capacity, as if removing an entirely fake playground stems true homicidal rage and definitely doesn’t point to failed parenting in teaching consequence or genuine mental illness.

[–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Okay but what about people of other races

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Take your upvote and get out.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

These people also care more about what happens to fictional people than what happens to real people.

They want to restrict access to virtual guns, but actively fight any efforts to restrict access to real ones. It's so dumb

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

Precisely. It's easy to give oneself the moral high ground when the hill you choose to die on costs significantly less in time, effort and money. Helping real people is far too expensive but if you make yourself sound like a humanitarian by defending fictional people then that's pretty cost-effective.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 12 points 10 months ago

This would make me want to do even more degenerate things in the game

[–] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 58 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] misterdoctor@lemmy.world 41 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I saw Anakin killing younglings

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

And i did nothing, because I'm not a youngling.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

"I won't kidnap kids, if that's what you're asking"

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 38 points 10 months ago

How dare people play with their dolls in the way they enjoy!?

[–] devilish666@lemmy.world 34 points 10 months ago
[–] ferb@sh.itjust.works 27 points 10 months ago

The indomitable human spirit

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 22 points 10 months ago

Why can’t they just let me abuse fake people in peace????

[–] arotrios@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago
[–] TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works 11 points 10 months ago

smh literally 1984