Slashdot Mirror
More Oblivion Re-Rating Fallout
The ESRB has a retort to the criticism leveled against it after rating Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Mature. The move has required Bethesda Softworks to pull all of the current stock of the game to relabel. From the GameDailyBiz article: "When we brought the topless female images to Bethesda Softworks' attention, they confirmed that the art file existed in a fully rendered form in the code on the game disc. The ESRB's investigation found that the mod allowed users to change the filename for the female character mesh in order to access the art file that was created by Bethesda. While true that a modification was required to access this file, the changes we implemented last year - expanding our disclosure rules to include locked-out content - were made to prevent these kinds of situations" Via Cathode Tan, who has his own commentary, an opinion piece by John Romero has yet another view of the complicated situation.
Small amounts of nudity are allowed in PG13 movies. However, if you have the same sort of nudity rendered in a videogame, it gets rated M. I'm not entirely clear why the Teen rating doesn't cover this for games...
This guy's the limit!
Do you have any idea how cruel it is to include the word "Fallout" in the story title of an article in the Games section?
Zonk, expect rabid RPG fans after you for raising their hopes, albeit by accident!
This is as if Snow White gets an R rating because someone splices in a few frames from a porn movie into one reel...
I would figure that the more violent a game was, the higher the rating would be on the game (mature, etc.) I thought violence was worse than a naked body of a woman. What truly is the worst evil? Violence or Naked Women? I think that the ESRB needs to get their priorities straight.
This is pretty interesting. The ESRB does not refute Bethesda's claims that the violence and gore was exactly what they had detailed, so this makes the violence and gore rationale an initial oversight by the ESRB and not a fault of Bethesda.
However, if the nude female images were present and simply "locked out" by Bethesda then we have pretty much the same story as the Hot Coffee incident. IMO the ESRB exists solely to enable parents to feel more confident about buying games for their children, and the idea that the ratings could be changed simply by "unlocking" something in the game does a lot to destroy this confidence.
Honestly, are either of these incidents really that different than if Nintendo were to implement nude characters in super mario bros 3 that was unlocked through an a-b-a-b-a-a-a code?
TV commercials around here at least after 10pm have been featuring a lot more sultry "friend finder" commercials on broadcast TV, and lightly censored 'girls gone wild' commercials on basic cable.
Far more offensive than pixellated boobies. Hell, the kids are likely on the internet in the first place to find out about the hack. If kids aren't already corrupted by all of the boobies [and worse!] on the internet, some scantly clad model isn't going to harm them.
I can't believe they intentionally put in a topless model. What I expect is this: The model was intended to be rendered together with a separate model covering the top, like additional pieces of armour that they want to run physics on, or a bra that they want to have changeable. By swapping the model with another one that doesn't have these additional features you see the base model. Sorry, but to emphasise it: We (=game developers) can't take responsibility for data files we didn't create, or for modifications to the game code that change object behaviour. So what about this disclaimer: Game Experience may change when using 3rd party modifications ? I mean, there is already the disclaimer Game Experience may change during online play, because nobody can control what other players in an online game say or do.
And I hope it erodes the ratings systems. If Oblivion gets an M rating for this nonsense, forget about what it means for Bethesda for a minute and think about what it says about the M rating? It sure changes the way I look at M rated games. Will this just shift all of the ratings up a level? If it does, then how much will these ratings mean to people if a game based on Sesame Street gets bumped up to a Teen rating because it depicts Oscar as homeless (or some better analogy that I can't think of, but you get the point)?
The next thing you know they will want to change any game where you can install custom skins to an 'M' rating simply because someone can download a custom model and have naked women everywhere. What I love throughout all this is that it isn't about violence (despite what the ESRB said) and solely about some "sexually explicit" content that by default is not accessible in the game. I guess I never realized how horribly ugly the female human form is...
While not necessarily right (and maybe not on point), it is absurd to think that the difference between 'T' and 'M' is going to make a difference in who buys these games. Now, the kids (I actually do not know any kids who play ES IV) just have to get their parents, who have shown total disregard for what their children are doing (see complaints about movie, television and game ratings...and the recent "myspace scare"), will blatantly ignore the ratings and purchase it anyway.
I would love to see some game makers stop using the ESRB all-together. Like the MPAA movie rating system, it is completely voluntary and even if a few places won't carry an un-rated game, I am sure plenty of legitimate video game retailers will be more then glad to sell such a game. Unfortunately, this probably will not happen because I would imagine that some of the larger retailers would be the ones refusing.
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
Because maybe they want to allow a mod for really skimpy outfits, that a sports bra wouldn't make possible?
My god, its 2006, why is nudity even an issue in media?
Sorry Dr Seuss, but we have to rate your new book M for sexual content, seems that some kid can go get a picture if a topless women, tape it in your book, and be exposed to nudity.
If I create a patch that makes Minnie Mouse and Daisy Duck naked in a Disney game, will the ESRB re-label that game as "M" and force Disney to pull it off the shelves?
ESRB are morons.
If I use Photoshop to give our our president a giant bare of woho's will they slap GW Bush with a mature rating?
So much worry over kids seeing anatomy possessed by half of the population. It's about time we got over this puritanical BS.
Face it, any kid with access to the Internet will find a way to view naked women, if he/she so desires. Kids are smart. They have friends with printers. The secret is out, women and girls have different parts than boys do.
If you want to make sure your kids grow up to be well-adjusted, talk to them and explain things. Make sure they have plenty of parental attention and affection. Tell them they can always come to you and talk about things. Don't let kids learn all about sex from their peers.
Oh, and teach them that there are more important matters for people to worry about than whether or not electronic models have breasts.
-All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
www.ra
I figured another slashdotter would comment on that part of Romero's post.
Modders are not screwing the industry; if anything is in this case, (and I really think the whole thing is being blown out of proportion) it's the fact that a depiction of female anatomy which the majority of users will never see is enough to warrant a change in rating. It. Is. A. Nipple. Jesus.
Neither are modders under any obligation to "help the industry". Game studios may well release data in the hope that mods will help their game sell more, but I doubt that very many modders have as their primary motivation a desire to help the studio, and I doubt that anyone but the most blinkered suits really thinks they do. Except Romero, of course.
Naked human beings in non-sexual settings in a video game.
Oh no. The end of our civilization is near.
And it won't be because of topless toons in some video game.
This topic is getting a bit tired, but the fact that this "retort" misses the greater issue is compelling.
1) Play Oblivion for 1 hour, you'll find zombies with their guts hanging out. The player is rewarded for bashing them MANY MANY times as they spray blood all over the walls. I don't see how Bethesda could have "hid" this from the ratings board - it shows up within minutes of play.
2) Talk to the various characters in the first town in the game, and you'll find out there's a "secret" guild that will let you in if you MURDER someone. In fact, you are very often rewarded for criminal activity in Oblivion. Going to jail is REQUIRED to complete at least one of the quests in the game (probably more, I don't know).
3) A nipple shows up in a downloadable mod, and OMG! change the rating to "Mature".
This isn't about Oblivion being rated "M", it's about the reason provided for the change. "More gore than initially disclosed" is ridiculous, because the game is chock full of gore and it's central to the gameplay itself. When the ESRB initially reviewed the game, did they even play it? My take is that Oblivion probably should've been rated "M" from the start. The game contains mature subject matter and it was no secret, plain and simple.
Are American Teens exposed to graphic violence through other means? Yes, certainly.
Are young children? I am reading the classic book, Farmer Boy, of the famed Little House on the Prarie series to my Kindergartner. In this book, the "older boys" in the school house gain reputation for "thrashing" teachers into submission with their fists. The replacement teacher is heralded for subdueing his attackers with a whip.
Does that make it a "good thing"(TM)? Nope. (see also: "Shikata ga nai")
Can a Teen process violence in entertainment and separate such depictions from the morality requisite to be a good citizen? Yes. "Mortal Combat" was a popular morality target in my teenage years, yet I never attempted a "Finishing Move" on any of my schoolmates, and I've grown up to be a good citizen by most accounts.
Can responsible, involved parents allow their brood to slash video game foes for fun? Yes. I enjoy such entertainment, and I'm sure my young'uns will too. Human beings are violent (see also: "history of civilization"). It'll be my decision to make concerning their maturity approaching such subject matter.
If my teen sees a booby, will all my hard parenting work unravel? God, I hope not. That would surely mean I'd done a terrible job educating my own on the birds and the bees. Believe it or not, I'd rather my kids look at boobies than bash skulls. Interest in sex is not unnatural (see also: "World Population").
ESRB claims the change is due to a lack of disclosure. Under normal circumstances, that would be an acceptable reason in my mind. However, the gratuitous and obvious violence in Oblivion calls into question the criteria by which the game was rated IN THE FIRST PLACE. The ESRB lacks credibility, and this debacle won't help that issue, that is certain.
pull all of the current stock of the game to relabel
Congratulations. Short of airdropping copies of the game over each major american city, there is no other possible action that would ensure people previously fence-sitting on the original version of the game will go through considerable effort to obtain a "real" copy.
You can hack and slash defenseless citizens, steal your way to financial independance, and support demon-like creatures to enslave mankind.
Seeing a pair of tits seems a bit trivial, yes?
To the hypocrites at the ESRB who seem to think violence is fine and nudity is a crime... rethink your policies, and rethink your hidden agendas. Nudity is not sex, which could be misconstrued as a mature theme. Every female on the planet has a vagina and breasts. Every male has a penis. These are anatomical features. Science. Fact. They are not the subversive agendas being pushed by conservatives to have us back in the social dark ages.
I am a player of Oblivion and I don't think for a second that any of the fantasy provided by this game is not enough for a 13 year old to grasp. By rating it mature, we're taking a modification to a game and making a big mountain out of a mole hill.
Let's boil this down, folks. I'd be much more worried about my 12 year old kid murding all the townfolk, supporting the daedric lords, playing out their virtual life as a vampric character. Not that there is anything wrong with the fantasy of any of those, but I'd want to make sure they understood the difference.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
is that the ESRB has to convene and decide to have an extra rating modifier of some sort to not only describe the game as shipped, but to have a rating for "possible modification" and for "online gameplay".
Statements of this sort already exist in a small sentence on most online games, where they'll state "Online Gameplay Experience May Be Different" or something (I don't recall the exact wording.) But the point is that ESRB would be much more effective with something like this.
I don't think developers and publishers will have a problem with that rating, and the ESRB gets all the info they want out there to cover their butts. I mean, to have something like "ONR" for Online Content Not Rated or something so parents can see that you cannot strictly regulate what happens or is said or written during online play, or a "MNR" for Modifications Not Rated.
It takes care of every instance of these types of issues. Developers and Publishers can know that their game will be rated as "intended" and ESRB gets to put in notices regarding the possibility of (or known issues regarding) more "mature content" in online or modded play.
As a parent this is the kind of game that I would want to know my teen was playing. I probably would not mind them playing it, but I would want to talk to them about it.
The whole naked mod thing is silly. If the logic they are using were to be followed then my web browser needs an AO rating. The ESRB should have just owned up to over looking the violence.
"Today we stike a blow against those who would allow our children to expose themselves to pornography. By requiring labotomys for all children at the age of 2, we can finally prevent them from being victims of the exploitation industry known as Media, not only will this step prevent them from being able to access pornography via brain implants or on the Internet, it will prevent them from content that describes nudity or violence, or comprehending adult language. While the previous eyeball removing and castration programs proved insufficent, we believe this is the ultimate solution to the problem of child exploitation."
"Children, we are not doing this 'to' you, we are doing it 'for' you."
Best quote from TFA: "the current rating system is drastically flawed and here is yet another reason why we need legislation to assist parents and protect children" [California Assemblyman Leland Yee].
That is exactly what I need for my kids, the US Gov't writing some helpful laws to this end. Perhaps they could help by also removing those extremely violent newscasts on the cable and network news outlets. The newspapers too. They are FILLED with reports of violence and war that are to the detriment of my children. Can you believe the SCHOOL in my hometown also teaches children about sometimes very gruesome and unsettling violence in history class, and I need laws to stop this from harming them. I can't do it all!
A good law to draft would be to transport all of my children to some sort of government educational facility, where they can learn to serve their country by putting down the violent people of the world through judicious use of lethal force. In this Utopian society, there would be no sex, because it is "dirty" and "very bad", and the law would provide men in jack boots to catch the teens "in the backseat trying to pick her locks", and they could "send them back to mother in a cardboard box".
I need help with the music out there these days too. Everyone knows the only good use for so-called "Heavy Metal" music is in psychological warfare.
As for games, we need wholesome, morality-based games. America's Army could teach my kids about responsible engagement, for instance. In that game, everyone plays as Americans! They only shoot "terrorist-looking" people, the way it should be.
And offensive movies should be re-cut. Take the terrific job done on "Brazil" (the love endures all ending). That movie was a real downer before some fine studio exec had it corrected.
Seriously, small children not only see breasts every day, they often SUCK on them! What exactly are we protecting children from by censoring nudity (breasts in this case)? Now, censoring gratuitous sex I can almost understand, but simple nudity? Come on.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Um, yeah. What the hell was I thinking? :)
Still, that wouldn't have prevented this. As mentioned many other times already, the mod involves pasting a barechested male texture over the female body size. I'm sure the same thing could be done with any of the Resident Evil or Dynasty Warrior titles. Are they all to be relabelled "mature" now?
One of the extras on the Shrek DVD has someone talking about how they did it for that movie, because it made the movement of clothing over the characters' bodies as they moved more realistic. So somewhere in the depths of Dreamworks's render farm, there's a nude Princess Fiona mesh. (And a nude Shrek, and Farquaad, but only go there if that's what floats your boat...)
It's only a matter of time before most 3D models use the same technique, because the technology is there and it does make things look better. So what's a developer to do? The nude character mesh has to be stored somewhere in order to get the clothing overlaid onto it.
If it were up to me, I'd slap little pasties on the female nipples reading "THANX ESRB". Heck, put 'em on the male nipples too, just to be Fair'n'Balanced.
The real solution is for America to get over itself. A teenager will see more pokey nipples in the clothing stores flanking Gameslop in the mall, and with a lot less effort, than in half a dozen videogames. (When the heck did mannequins all get pokey nipples, by the way? I stopped going to malls for the last few years of my first marriage, and when I started up again a couple of years ago, all the female mannequins had been molded in very cold rooms, if you know what I mean...)
We can believe in you for 3 minutes, but beyond that, even the King of All Cosmos can't be expected to wait.
BUT it is there, naked titties. In the game as you buy it in the store.
No, it is not in the game.
It is on the game disk, but it is not in the game.
There is no way to see it in the game without modifying the game. Therefore, it is NOT IN THE GAME.
When will people learn to think.
By your logic, every bar in the country should be treated as a strip club, because those waitresses are naked. Um, like under their clothes. But they have naked skin and they're in the bar, and they might take those clothes off, see? If one of them got naked in the bar, it wouldn't have involved a naked girl coming into the bar from outside, the naked girl would have been in there all along, just wearing clothes. So all those waitresses should be treated as strippers, and the bars should be regulated as strip clubs. QED.
Both, actually.
There's the shipped male-torso-with-nipple that is used on female bodies but covered with a bra. All that's needed to use this one is replace the bra texture with nothing; so, it's in the game, but it's not actually meant for female bodies (it's got everything in the wrong places).
Then, other modders have reskinned the female torso to make "proper" breasts. This requires installing a mod to override the textures.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.
I need horrific violence _and_ exposed nipples to really jerk off properly.
Help me?
Good distraction from all the shady stuff our government is into.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
In related news, it has recently been discovered by hackers that one is able to play with a "nude skin" for Barbie doll, merely by removing her clothes. While Mattel claims that the nude Barbie is only viewable after alteration by the end user, the Consumer Product Safety Commission insists while hidden, the nude Barbie is contained in the product as shipped.
First you animate. Then you SUSPEND!!!
All views on the video games rating system aside, who was the idiot that allowed this material to remain in the commercial shipment of the software? Don't they read the news? Did they somehow miss that whole "hot coffee" debacle, despite its appearance on every major US news network? What the hell did they expect to happen when someone inevitably discovered a way to access the questionable material?
Then why not put a sports bra or something on the basic character model?
That is in fact what they did: femaleupperbody.nif is the end product of femaleupperbodynude.nif with a bra mesh permanently welded onto it, with the appropriate texture for the bra mapped to that area. Problem is they forgot to turf the nude one, which was no longer needed when the game was ready to ship. The nude one is not used when they have clothes overtop, as one might think that was why it was there, because of problems with the bra messing with the clothing, but no, it does not actually get used by the engine at all. The bottom has a similar mesh with perma-panties, however there is no corresponding nude mesh for that part. Damn.
As mentioned many other times already, the mod involves pasting a barechested male texture over the female body size.
l e.dds which is what the nude mesh uses natively, with no modifications at all. The nude mesh simply has to be extracted from the .bsa file the game came with and renamed to replace the non-nude mesh. I am seeing that quite a few people posting to this topic have very different ideas about how this mod is done, so I'll lay it down for you:
Trust me, there is nothing male about textures\characters\imperial\female\upperbodyfema
There is a third-party program called tes4bsa. Its whole job is to unpack the game's art and sound files from the proprietary archive format they are in. That's all it does, it makes no changes to any of the content at all. It is an essential tool for making your own unique copies of objects for a mod you want to do, as you have to be able to browse to the nif file when making a new object. With Morrowind they gave you all the art files unpacked on the second CD. So this tes4bsa merely enables the tradtional means of modding this game, so that it is available again as we modders were used to with MW.
1. Download tes4bsa, and put it in the Data folder.
2. Run it to unpack the textures archive.
3. Navigate to Data\meshes\characters\_male (yes, it doesn't sound like there's females in here, but there are, don't ask me why)
4. Delete femaleupperbody.nif and rename femaleupperbodynude.nif to drop the word nude.
5. Play the game, find a dead woman (or, um, stalk and kill one) and loot her clothes. See?
Note that no textures were modified, or superimposed on anything, or even touched. No hacking out of mesh coordinates to remove the perma-bra that the default female characters actually use in-game. Just unpack the art files, delete one file and rename another. This content is not the result of any user input whatsoever.
I wonder if there is a connection: Just as many of us don't RTFA, we also seem to have a propensity for not TTFE (trying the fabulous experiment) before talking about it like we know what's happening. This is not a flame on anyone, just an observation.
...but look.
:) This group, in the end, is pretty much blind and unaware of what their kid does, and the most recent generation still hasn't realized that little Albert the Straight-A Accountant (pride and joy of the family) spent his high school years playing Giant Buckets of Blood and Guns, in between watching Attack of the Boob Creatures IV. And finally, there's the majority of educated America, who doesn't give a shit if Ralphie buys Duke Nukem Touches the Boob IV, because in between bouts of this, the kid's nutured and fearless mind seeks out Dickens and Proust.
The people these ratings laws are designed for are fucking stupid. Look around you. Your 13 year old friends probably played Mortal Kombat, right? DOOM, tons of fighting games, some R rated movies... and how many of them are killers?
I played DOOM when I was, let's see... 12. Has it messed me up for life? Other than that I'm up at 2 in the morning posting about it to Slashdot, no, I can't say that it has.
So. These people don't know themselves. They don't know their kids. They don't trust humanity. They are, in the words of Frank Zappa, Big Stupid.
And the problem with bending over for Big Stupid is that Big Stupid is never happy. Their distrust of humanity runs infinitely deep, and they will always ask for something more. Something bigger. Something should be done - to help the CHILDREN!!. Every Big Stupid retard overflows with smug self-satisfaction - it's the QED of retard debate.
And anyway, the ESRB was created in panic and fear during the MK days - much like, oh, the PATRIOT Act. And laws and institutions that are created in a panicked, stupid uproar, as far as I can figure, are always destined to fail. The ESRB, the PATRIOT Act, the Hays Office (created during the wake of the Fatty Arbuckle sex scandal, basically sanitized all movies from the mid 1930s up until the 60s), Prohibition, contraception legislation - all created from fear. Fear of angry parents (who would hurt the videogame industry... how? Oh, by denying a few sales... sort of... uh... like what they're doing now?). Fear of TERRORISTS. Fear of looking scandalous. Fear of being scandalous. Fear of the Lord God in Heaven.
Since we can say "stop making laws that are merely reactions to fear" until we're blue in the face and nothing will change, how about something like... oh, how about attack these constructions (the ESRB, RIAA, what have you) not because they're stupid (because stupid is very, very hard to objectively ram home), but because they're un-American, un-Christian (hello, tolerance?), un-profitable, un-necessary, and finally, a hazard to our continued survival.
Violence on a computer screen harms no child.
So why regulate it? Fact is that the parents who are truly upset about this are already the type who keep Little Johnny free from TV, Nintendo, flouride, evolution, and sugary cereals, and are perfectly used to micro-managing. Then you have a large army of "WELL, THIS IS THE RIGHT PRINCIPLE!!" morons who are equally harmful to society - it sounds good to them, it sounds like something nice, something that should be done!
The ESRB is set up to protect the first group, with the nod and Positive Thoughts of the second group. And it's a fucking retarded disaster.
(Devil's Advocate: The suggestable, likely superstitious child that would be harmed from violence on a computer screen (harmed = affected beyond tears and the urge to look away) is a walking schizophrenic time-bomb anyway, and there comes a point where you learn that, sadly, nothing can be done to help - lest we all live in fear and subject every instance of our existance to the kid who can send us all to the cornfield.)
Anyway. I just needed to get that off my chest, I like the words I used, and so-- (one minute later) --and good lord I'm so glad I use Firefox - somehow I navigated away from this rant (possibly a bug? It happens in IE t