I've come to a decision

[tmac9wr]

 

I don't get people who are offended by killing animals/kids in video games

 

If they're in the game, I'll mow animals and kids down in my car trying to escape the police on a 5 star wanted level

 

Because they're not real, it is a video game, people just can't distinguish reality from fiction

 

I guarantee if the people who did 9/11 were able to do it in a video game, 9/11 never would have happened

Kids should absolutely not be in the game. I'm less concerned about animals, but there's absolutely no justification to have children in the game.

 

In RDR, animals were a part of the natural landscape...they lived in the plains, mountains, etc. and were the major mode of transportation of the time period. It made a lot of sense to have them there. In GTA, it makes less sense, but I don't see any problem with having some dogs running around the suburban neighborhoods or horses living on farms out in the country.

 

However there should never be children allowed in the game. It's tasteless. I understand the "it's just a game" argument, but it doesn't apply with children. R* would never include children because:

 

1. While R* likes to push the envelope and give gamers tough choices, I don't think they have any interest in adding children to the equation. I know there were early plans in GTAIII to include children...but times have changed a lot since then. They've made a lot of additions, but still haven't tried to add children.

 

2. It would lead to an AO rating in the United States and an outright ban in several other countries. The sales would drop to about 20% of what it would be as an M-rated game without kids. That alone means it'll never happen.

Edited February 12, 2012 by tmac9wr

[jnzooger]

I don't get people who are offended by killing animals/kids in video games

 

If they're in the game, I'll mow animals and kids down in my car trying to escape the police on a 5 star wanted level

 

Because they're not real, it is a video game, people just can't distinguish reality from fiction

 

I guarantee if the people who did 9/11 were able to do it in a video game, 9/11 never would have happened

Kids should absolutely not be in the game. I'm less concerned about animals, but there's absolutely no justification to have children in the game.

 

In RDR, animals were a part of the natural landscape...they lived in the plains, mountains, etc. and were the major mode of transportation of the time period. It made a lot of sense to have them there. In GTA, it makes less sense, but I don't see any problem with having some dogs running around the suburban neighborhoods or horses living on farms out in the country.

 

However there should never be children allowed in the game. It's tasteless. I understand the "it's just a game" argument, but it doesn't apply with children. R* would never include children because:

 

1. While R* likes to push the envelope and give gamers tough choices, I don't think they have any interest in adding children to the equation. I know there were early plans in GTAIII to include children...but times have changed a lot since then. They've made a lot of additions, but still haven't tried to add children.

 

2. It would lead to an AO rating in the United States and an outright ban in several other countries. The sales would drop to about 20% of what it would be as an M-rated game without kids. That alone means it'll never happen.

1: This topic wasn't about kids as far as I can tell.

 

2: Underage characters have been in Red Dead Revolver (killable), Red Dead Redemption (killable), Vice City Stories (cutscenes), GTA Advance (unkillable), and potentially more.

 

3: Nothing says that children, animals, others would automatically mean an AO rating. You assume too much there.

[senor_huevos_benedicto]

I don't get people who are offended by killing animals/kids in video games

 

If they're in the game, I'll mow animals and kids down in my car trying to escape the police on a 5 star wanted level

 

Because they're not real, it is a video game, people just can't distinguish reality from fiction

 

I guarantee if the people who did 9/11 were able to do it in a video game, 9/11 never would have happened

Kids should absolutely not be in the game. I'm less concerned about animals, but there's absolutely no justification to have children in the game.

 

In RDR, animals were a part of the natural landscape...they lived in the plains, mountains, etc. and were the major mode of transportation of the time period. It made a lot of sense to have them there. In GTA, it makes less sense, but I don't see any problem with having some dogs running around the suburban neighborhoods or horses living on farms out in the country.

 

However there should never be children allowed in the game. It's tasteless. I understand the "it's just a game" argument, but it doesn't apply with children. R* would never include children because:

 

1. While R* likes to push the envelope and give gamers tough choices, I don't think they have any interest in adding children to the equation. I know there were early plans in GTAIII to include children...but times have changed a lot since then. They've made a lot of additions, but still haven't tried to add children.

 

2. It would lead to an AO rating in the United States and an outright ban in several other countries. The sales would drop to about 20% of what it would be as an M-rated game without kids. That alone means it'll never happen.

1: This topic wasn't about kids as far as I can tell.

 

2: Underage characters have been in Red Dead Revolver (killable), Red Dead Redemption (killable), Vice City Stories (cutscenes), GTA Advance (unkillable), and potentially more.

 

3: Nothing says that children, animals, others would automatically mean an AO rating. You assume too much there.

Point out the killable children/teenagers in Red Dead Redemption.

[CheesyJ]

I don't see what the problem with all of this is. Animals were in RDR, and you were allowed to brutally slaughter them. Why is it any different for a GTA game?

[jnzooger]

Point out the killable children/teenagers in Red Dead Redemption.

Jack Marston (16) before the end of the game, Millicent Waterbury (15) in Undead Nightmare, and Miranda Fortuna (13).

 

I also forgot Jill Von Crastenburg, who was 13 during GTA IV.

[FelipeVinhao]

Nice knowing you've come to a decision. Rockstar probably also had before you, we just don't know what is it yet.

 

You people who argue or agree about killing animals must think outside this box of "why people get offended by this", because it's not.

 

The series is (or should I say was?) considered controversial by putting yourself in the shoes of the criminal. A game where you're not the hero, but just another criminal in the city, and still is one of the most profitable existing games.

 

Can you count how many times this game was considered "guilty" for influencing people to commit crimes? Worse, for influencing kids, even if this game is rated for 17+ only? Shouldn't bad-parenting be the cause of this then?

 

When Rockstar finally avoided this one, they tried to ban this game for other reasons based on new game features. Killing prostitutes to get the money back, explicit sex (it was a hidden feature in fact), drinking and driving, just to mention some.

 

If there'll be animals in game is up to Rockstar. If they know and are prepared for what will come against them this time, you may see the animals in GTA5. If the animals will be as dumb is the one from Duke Nukem 3D and not influence in game, is up to you being a sick bastard and kill the innocent creature, just like killing the random pedestrians from GTA.

 

I prefer thinking people do this in games so they don't do this in real life, probably they have good parents that teach what can and can't be done in real life, and they noticed their dear kids don't have mental issues before playing these games, instead of blaming the game company for their kids killing the whole classroom.

[Supernutz40]

I don't really see a need for dogs and cats in GTA. I haven't really studied the trailer, but is it possible that the dog(s) are only in cut scenes?

 

Edit: That said, it might add a new level of fun to wanted level chases when on foot if there are K9 cops chasing you. But that would pretty much seal the dogs fate in the game...

Edited February 12, 2012 by JesseHope40

[HOTMILFDAD]

I don't really see a need for dogs and cats in GTA. I haven't really studied the trailer, but is it possible that the dog(s) are only in cut scenes?

I dunno.

That beach scene didn't seem like cutscene.

[EscoLehGo]

why do people equate animals with children on this forum? literally two completely different animals

[HOTMILFDAD]

why do people equate animals with children on this forum? literally two completely different animals

Because there hasn't been any in any GTA game yet

[RockStarNiko]

Animals should be included in the countryside

 

Just like in RDR we can go hunting or fishing as an activity

 

After hunting/fishing you and your friends make a campfire in the woods/on the beach and eat what you hunted

 

For other animals you can sell fur, hides, antlers etc at countryside stores

Can't we just play RDR to do that?

what a stupid statement

 

yeah we could just play RDR if we want to go hunting

 

but why stop there

 

people expect and want COUNTRYSIDE to be in GTA V

 

i could say "can't we just play RDR for countryside"

 

stop being so closed minded and a fool

[D.Dodge]

I just want them in them because they make the game more lifelike.

 

We've seen the same sh*t for 4 GTA's now, it's time to add something new. I was waiting for this since GTA VC. I'm an animal lover and I get why people are concerned that retards may have sadistic thoughts. But it's the same thing that people go out and kill people and blame GTA for it.

 

I just feel sad that we are restricted thanks to retarted mental ill people.

[tmac9wr]

I don't get people who are offended by killing animals/kids in video games

 

If they're in the game, I'll mow animals and kids down in my car trying to escape the police on a 5 star wanted level

 

Because they're not real, it is a video game, people just can't distinguish reality from fiction

 

I guarantee if the people who did 9/11 were able to do it in a video game, 9/11 never would have happened

Kids should absolutely not be in the game. I'm less concerned about animals, but there's absolutely no justification to have children in the game.

 

In RDR, animals were a part of the natural landscape...they lived in the plains, mountains, etc. and were the major mode of transportation of the time period. It made a lot of sense to have them there. In GTA, it makes less sense, but I don't see any problem with having some dogs running around the suburban neighborhoods or horses living on farms out in the country.

 

However there should never be children allowed in the game. It's tasteless. I understand the "it's just a game" argument, but it doesn't apply with children. R* would never include children because:

 

1. While R* likes to push the envelope and give gamers tough choices, I don't think they have any interest in adding children to the equation. I know there were early plans in GTAIII to include children...but times have changed a lot since then. They've made a lot of additions, but still haven't tried to add children.

 

2. It would lead to an AO rating in the United States and an outright ban in several other countries. The sales would drop to about 20% of what it would be as an M-rated game without kids. That alone means it'll never happen.

1: This topic wasn't about kids as far as I can tell.

 

2: Underage characters have been in Red Dead Revolver (killable), Red Dead Redemption (killable), Vice City Stories (cutscenes), GTA Advance (unkillable), and potentially more.

 

3: Nothing says that children, animals, others would automatically mean an AO rating. You assume too much there.

1. I know it was about animals, but the post which I quoted was referring to both children and animals...so that's what I replied to.

 

2. I never saw any kids in RDR, though I never played Undead Nightmare.

 

3. I don't think animals would lead to it...but children, yes. Absolutely. In my opinion, there's absolutely no way a game featuring openly killable children is going to have anything less than an AO rating, if permitted to release at all.

 

You've made references to 16 year old "children", but that's not what most of us are thinking. When I hear "child" I'm thinking anywhere between 5-11 years old. While an under-aged teenager may technically be a child in the eyes of the law, let's not pretend they're the same as a kid who's still learning to ride their bicycle.

 

You mentioned Chloe Parker, but I don't remember seeing her in GTA other than on the TV. Even if they made her a killable character, they personified her as someone who was in their 20s

 

I don't have any problem with them referring to children or including them in story lines. However, I don't think it should be an option to mow down elementary-aged children in an ice cream truck.

 

People are killed all the time in games. Even sometimes children are included (like in Bioshock, Modern Warfare 3...I'm sure there are others). What separates GTA from all other games is the ability to massacre innocent people. I won't dive further into it, because we all know what the safety groups all bitch about and we know how ludicrous it can be...but enabling people to massacre children would be too much for any ratings agency to overlook.

 

On top of that, I don't really want children to be in the game...I don't really care about the animals as long as they're few and far between...but GTA is supposed to be fun as hell. I don't want them to take a turn towards Manhunt...I want it to be more like San Andreas or Vice City. The balance between over-the-top violence and comedy has always been one of the strongest parts of GTA. Adding kids to this tips the scale too far in one direction in my opinion.

 

I think the general public probably feels this way too, and R* is mindful of this.

[EscoLehGo]

why do people equate animals with children on this forum? literally two completely different animals

Because there hasn't been any in any GTA game yet

what are you saying? there haven't been children or animals in any GTA game? because that, good sir, is an entirely false observation!

[OGCFB]

The way I see it the protagonists are usually already bad enough guys without adding child murder and animal slaughter to the list.

[Slamman]

Duke Nukem resurrected is highly flawed, you maybe the only one appreciating the latest iteration.

I'd say that the animals are not really an issue, Sam Houser expressed before there wasn't a need for Children in such a game, so they basically drew a line in the sand, don't expect any children in GTA, because it's not required, Animals are just fine however, in fleshing out the AI World in 3D that GTA is evolving in

[tmac9wr]

I just want them in them because they make the game more lifelike.

 

We've seen the same sh*t for 4 GTA's now, it's time to add something new. I was waiting for this since GTA VC. I'm an animal lover and I get why people are concerned that retards may have sadistic thoughts. But it's the same thing that people go out and kill people and blame GTA for it.

 

I just feel sad that we are restricted thanks to retarted mental ill people.

I agree that it's a shame that games are often restricted by the few nutjobs out there...but let's also take into consideration whether R* wants to include things like animals. What exactly are we missing out on by not being able to slaughter a dog or cat?

 

Are you really going to be on a police chase, run over a dog and then yell out "OMG SO REAL! THIS IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN GTA IV"

 

To paraphrase Ian Malcolm:

"You were so preoccupied with whether you could, that you never stopped to think if you should!"

 

[Slamman]

Another Nigel ;-) fauxpa is that there were animals in GTA, only a tiny amount if we think solely birds, but Red Dead Red is teaming with wildlife, and you can see how it helps immersion!

The thing that GTA improves upon is for those lacking RDR release on PC, they can get GTA with animals and improved RAGE that should give them something of an RDR feel for what they are missing out on (as of the moment)

[senor_huevos_benedicto]

Animals should be included in the countryside

 

Just like in RDR we can go hunting or fishing as an activity

 

After hunting/fishing you and your friends make a campfire in the woods/on the beach and eat what you hunted

 

For other animals you can sell fur, hides, antlers etc at countryside stores

Can't we just play RDR to do that?

what a stupid statement

 

yeah we could just play RDR if we want to go hunting

 

but why stop there

 

people expect and want COUNTRYSIDE to be in GTA V

 

i could say "can't we just play RDR for countryside"

 

stop being so closed minded and a fool

I meant the "selling to a shop" thing - that belongs in the Old West.

[Slamman]

You do kill plenty of not so harmless animals in Red Dead Red, now imagine they have house break ins return as a side mission, you have to use stealth to avoid waking the residents, (using past GTA SA as an example) but a barking or attack dog protects the place, home or warehouse? It'd be a neat addition to GTA gaming

[tmac9wr]

Another Nigel ;-) fauxpa is that there were animals in GTA, only a tiny amount if we think solely birds, but Red Dead Red is teaming with wildlife, and you can see how it helps immersion!

The thing that GTA improves upon is for those lacking RDR release on PC, they can get GTA with animals and improved RAGE that should give them something of an RDR feel for what they are missing out on (as of the moment)

Agreed but the role of animals in RDR was crucial and totally necessary. I don't have any problem with animals being included in GTA, as long as it's done sparingly and only in certain areas. Rural areas, farms, mountains, etc. for any animal that isn't a dog or cat. That sort of thing.

 

However, it's not sensible to compare the role of animals in RDR to their potential use in GTA. They're totally different.

[Snake Without a Tongue]

what a stupid statement

 

yeah we could just play RDR if we want to go hunting

 

but why stop there

 

people expect and want COUNTRYSIDE to be in GTA V

 

i could say "can't we just play RDR for countryside"

 

stop being so closed minded and a fool

I'll be blunt where senor_huevos_benedicto was polite.

 

No one trades pelts in modern California!

[Dick Valor]

Well I can finally sleep well knowing you've made a decision

 

Personally I think it's a sign of R*'s cowardly nature.  They didn't mind taking risks with sex and violence when they were a budding game company, but now that they're big they tip-toe around psychos like PETA.  "Oh no! Someone might write us a letter!?!".  Grow some balls Rockstar and just go for it!  Add in Animal killing, give us some more Hot Coffee, stop bowing down to pressure from the crazy minority.  I don't see why shooting up Animals is wrong but blowing a person to bits is fine 

 

"Don't hurt that dog! His pixels make him look fuzzy! Oh, that bum? Put a slug in his head!" lol

Uhmm, they already grew some balls, and they showed us that with Red Dead Redemption, there were hundreds of animals you could kill, so get your facts straight before you say Rockstar is scared to put animals in a game, because they already did!

Not only that; you even earned trophies for killing one of every species and wiping out the buffalo.

[turkeygoo2]

They AREN'T REAL!!!!!!!!!!

[Capricornus]

You don't have to kill an animal or human in GTA. That's how R* is getting away with it.

Yes indeed.

 

Too many pussies in this world if you ask me. People are overly sensitive to damn near everything, and obviously animals. I don't see the big deal either.

 

What people, as in society, likes to forget is that GTA is based off of what happens in real life. They tend to act as if people weren't getting killed before the top-down days of GTA.

 

America, the land of pussies. Stinking pussies too.

[StockLoc]

I think it's got more so to do with what people will make of the graphical nature of today's games in terms of violence and gore, you place that with animals and certain people will go crazy at the thought of animals body parts flying every where.

Although Rockstar did it really good with Red Dead Redemption so I don't see what the fuss would be this time round with another Rockstar title.

During the time of Red Dead Redemption, it was acceptable to harm animals. Animals were seen as non-living things.

 

The time period GTA V takes place in is completely different. It is very similar to the locales most people live in and harming an animal on the streets of Los Santos could transition to putting a cat in the microwave in real life.

 

We'd get used to not 'feeling' bad when we kill animals and we may do it in real life.

 

-Stock Loc

[Raptomex]

Whether other games have the feature or not you should be able to in GTA just because you can. This whole morality thing we have going on here really needs to be put to an end. Animals, children, kill them all. It's a video game.

[FelipeVinhao]

I'm seeing to much references about RDR around here.

 

As far as I know, as I've never played RDR, but I want it very much, it DOES have animals, but there they represent danger to your life. A wild bear isn't a pet.

 

But in GTA, what would a chihuahua do against a guy holding an RPG? Pissing in his legs, a second before taking a granade in the face? Gimma' break.

 

GTA5 will have countryside, forest, desert, montains? Yes, sure. Will it have wild animals that will mean danger to player? Who knows... Will there be dogs? Mafia 2 trailer had cats, did you see one that you could really interact? Think about it. If there'll be dogs, how important they'll be to game? Unless they add a K9 unit to police, they'll be as useful as other pedestrians.

 

I don't care if they add or not animals. For realism, it'd be great. There's a recurring in-game joke about pets not appearing because of local laws. They could break this and bring a new joke the same way they did to motorcycles. But bringing them to game just because you want to kill them in game, then you really got issues.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

To the OP: Love the title

 

On a more serious note, why is it okay or an "act of nature" to have animals harm the human players in games but it's some kind of "in humane act" when it's the other way around?

 

These animal lovers kill me sometimes with their BS...protesting what one is allowed to do with a collection of pixels sounds silly if you ask me.(cough cough Jack Thompson)

[73duster]

1 - It's rediculous for anyone to think that anything is off limits in a game that is based on being over the top in terms of sex and violence. Anyone who does'nt know what GTA is about has been hiding under a rock.

2 - There is NOTHING short of rape, that has'nt already been implemented in other video games numerous times. Killing animals is NO worse than killing humans, and has ALREADY been implemented in Red Dead Redemption, a game from the same developer of GTA.

3 - Last but not least, i love animals as much as PETA, or anyone else, but it's a F*CKING game! Get over it!