The Xbox used to be a moral quandry for me also... but I look at it this way. The Xbox keeps me from the temptation of booting windows to run games. It costs MS money to sell one to me. I have the ability to abstain from buying new games at least 90% of the time (sorry, I WILL buy Halo 3 the day it is released), so I don't contribute to their war chest any more than absolutely neccessary for my gaming habit (and no, don't tell me I can live without Halo.. not gonna happen). Actually I'm starting to find a comfortable spot with them as far as gaming goes. My actual quandry is unusual, because I was all about MS going down, but since they are having to actually compete in this market such that I do have a choice of toys to buy, it seems that they are doing many things better than the competition. My main happy point right now is that you won't be forced to buy an HD-DVD drive ala Sony and their attempt to shove Blu-Ray down everybodies throat.. especially since that is NOT a needed feature for playing games (most of the space on games nowdays is used to store pre-rendered cinematics.. now that we can render that all in real time, well, you do the math). In some ways MS have gained a smidgeon of respect back from me. Certainly not in thier PC products, but I certainly see the 360 as the lesser of 2 evils when compared to the PS3 (yes, in spite of my love for Linux). I truley don't want either console to fail, as the competition is great for the field, but Sony really needs to be taken down a couple of rungs. Seriously. So, in spite of my incredible anti-ms bias, I'm fully for the 360 over the PS3.
It bothers me greatly that it seems that some people are looking the other way just because Sony has decided to use Linux on the console. Don't let them buy you off with that bait.
You, I'm afraid, are one of the ones who have an incorrect understanding of what is happening. No, this is not the exact same situation that Bethesda find themselves in. No, they would not be held responsible for something like this. This would be more like, if the childrens book had porn in it to start with, but the pages were simply glued together to hide it. The content was there, on the original media, from the publisher. Not placed there by a third party.
"However, the texture that was modified IS a male texture."
What in the world are you talking about? There is no texture being modified. It's simply placing the unused female nude texture in the correct directory structure for it to be accesed by the game instead of the not nude one.
*Looks down*... nope, no sand there, but misinformation does rub me the wrong way. Especially when it's something somebody pulled out of their ass and has NO bearing whatsoever in reality, and doubly so when it seems like everybody has latched onto it for dear life like some salvation or something.
Why do you care what I post? You really think these guys would notice 1 little bitty post with the link in these pages of madness?
Lol, not really, guess I was kinda on a roll. I've learned it takes repetition, to the extent of flailing people over the head with stuff to get things to sink in. This "male texture on a female mesh" stuff came out of thin air pretty much, and has spread like the plague. It needs to be nipped in the bud. Enough trouble has come about from legit info, nobody needs to feed that with bogus info.
"Neither you, nor anyone else, has yet managed to come up with an explanation of why this is so significant
Ok, I'll do it. Whether you accept the explanation, as simple as it is, is not my problem. The significance is that it is content that is shipped on the disk from the publisher, and the ESRB requires disclosure of ALL content on the disk, whether it is accessible from within the game or not. This keep the scenario of the "OMG Ponies!!!1!!" game, that has Barbie riding her pony around the stages from becoming animal porn when somebody finds that there is "OMG Friends of Ponies and more!!!!11!!" movies hidden on the disk and unlocks them. Note, this has nothing whatsoever to do with anyone putting their own brand of pony movie together and inserting it into the game, it only concerns the ones that shipped on the game disk.
No, they're not male. I'm not sure where this rumor started, but I think it was on some forum where I read a message that was saying Bethesda should lie and say it was actually the male texture used on the female mesh.
Looks pretty female to me. I was getting tired of all the "it's a male upper body texture mapped to the female mesh" talk and decided to dig a little bit.. not that it took that much digging, but anyways, there it is, supposedly the base texture in question.
I have seen no evidence that the file was for the male character. The only place I've seen it talked about was by people saying that they read somewhere that it was. Bethesda even admits there was the nude female texture (as that is what it was being referred to), and hasn't said anything about it being for the male. In fact, *I* read on a forum that it was because Bethesda had at first the idea to put some topless dancing girls in and that is where the texture originated. They later decided to pull that but didn't remove the texture. So I would think that seems more logical, therefore the mesh is NOT from a male.
I don't think it's hypocracy at all. I think it was a simple mistake (well, maybe not that simple, but a mistake nevertheless). My feeling all along has been that the re-rating was mainly about the amount/level of gore that the ESRB claims not to have been aware of, and that the nipple incedent is just one more thing on top of that, but not the deciding factor. I think the media has been a big factor in making it seem like that is so. In fact, the 360 version is being re-rated also, and specifically due to gore since, at least atm everyone seems to actually believe ms's claim that it won't be modded.. hehe... that'll be so fun to watch when it happens. Note that was not an "if", but a "when".
So all this hoopla ya'll are stirring up about being re-rated due to nipples instead of violence are doing nothing but feeding that media hype machine that regurgitates it. Truth of the matter is that it's violence and gore that got the game re-rated, as told by the ESRB when they re-rated the 360 version.
It bugs me to no end that all you people that think you're so great and technically superior to the avg human being can't read and comprehend an article worth a shit. I mean, in the articles it says...
"Our raters re-reviewed the game along with the more extreme depictions of blood and gore that ESRB uncovered and felt that the game was deserving of a Mature rating. Though Bethesda may believe their submission was 'full, accurate and comprehensive,' our investigation proved otherwise, forcing us to correct what was found to be an inaccurate rating."
and...
"The content causing the ESRB to change the rating involves more detailed depictions of blood and gore than were considered in the original rating, as well as the presence of a locked-out art file or 'skin' that, if accessed through a third party modification to the PC version of the game, allows the user to play with topless versions of female characters,"
How to you get to the consensus shown here of being so prudely that the display of a nipple changes the rating rather than the gore, when it's quite clear in the articles that, to the ESRB it was indeed the ultra-violence that prompted the ratings change? I can see that this gets clouded a bit, as it's obvious the reporters of the article seem to be clouding the issue by hyping the nude bit, but that's obviously a much smaller issue than the violence when you actually read the words from the ESRB.
Slashdot Mirror
The Xbox used to be a moral quandry for me also... but I look at it this way. The Xbox keeps me from the temptation of booting windows to run games. It costs MS money to sell one to me. I have the ability to abstain from buying new games at least 90% of the time (sorry, I WILL buy Halo 3 the day it is released), so I don't contribute to their war chest any more than absolutely neccessary for my gaming habit (and no, don't tell me I can live without Halo.. not gonna happen). Actually I'm starting to find a comfortable spot with them as far as gaming goes. My actual quandry is unusual, because I was all about MS going down, but since they are having to actually compete in this market such that I do have a choice of toys to buy, it seems that they are doing many things better than the competition. My main happy point right now is that you won't be forced to buy an HD-DVD drive ala Sony and their attempt to shove Blu-Ray down everybodies throat.. especially since that is NOT a needed feature for playing games (most of the space on games nowdays is used to store pre-rendered cinematics.. now that we can render that all in real time, well, you do the math). In some ways MS have gained a smidgeon of respect back from me. Certainly not in thier PC products, but I certainly see the 360 as the lesser of 2 evils when compared to the PS3 (yes, in spite of my love for Linux). I truley don't want either console to fail, as the competition is great for the field, but Sony really needs to be taken down a couple of rungs. Seriously. So, in spite of my incredible anti-ms bias, I'm fully for the 360 over the PS3.
It bothers me greatly that it seems that some people are looking the other way just because Sony has decided to use Linux on the console. Don't let them buy you off with that bait.
It's a trick. Get an axe.
I'll take the slightly lower resolution over rewinding *2* tapes *anyday*.
"Take-Two has nothing to do with the game"
Other than the fact that 2K Games, the publisher of Oblivion, is Take-Two.
You must be new here.
Why persist? I don't let the noobs get me down. Never give up, never surrender.
You, I'm afraid, are one of the ones who have an incorrect understanding of what is happening. No, this is not the exact same situation that Bethesda find themselves in. No, they would not be held responsible for something like this. This would be more like, if the childrens book had porn in it to start with, but the pages were simply glued together to hide it. The content was there, on the original media, from the publisher. Not placed there by a third party.
"However, the texture that was modified IS a male texture."
What in the world are you talking about? There is no texture being modified. It's simply placing the unused female nude texture in the correct directory structure for it to be accesed by the game instead of the not nude one.
*Looks down*... nope, no sand there, but misinformation does rub me the wrong way. Especially when it's something somebody pulled out of their ass and has NO bearing whatsoever in reality, and doubly so when it seems like everybody has latched onto it for dear life like some salvation or something.
Why do you care what I post? You really think these guys would notice 1 little bitty post with the link in these pages of madness?
Lol, not really, guess I was kinda on a roll. I've learned it takes repetition, to the extent of flailing people over the head with stuff to get things to sink in. This "male texture on a female mesh" stuff came out of thin air pretty much, and has spread like the plague. It needs to be nipped in the bud. Enough trouble has come about from legit info, nobody needs to feed that with bogus info.
For the umpteenth time, it's NOT a male texture.
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
See for yourself.
NOT a male texture...
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
"Neither you, nor anyone else, has yet managed to come up with an explanation of why this is so significant
Ok, I'll do it. Whether you accept the explanation, as simple as it is, is not my problem. The significance is that it is content that is shipped on the disk from the publisher, and the ESRB requires disclosure of ALL content on the disk, whether it is accessible from within the game or not. This keep the scenario of the "OMG Ponies!!!1!!" game, that has Barbie riding her pony around the stages from becoming animal porn when somebody finds that there is "OMG Friends of Ponies and more!!!!11!!" movies hidden on the disk and unlocks them. Note, this has nothing whatsoever to do with anyone putting their own brand of pony movie together and inserting it into the game, it only concerns the ones that shipped on the game disk.
"Nobody included bare female chest textures in this game."
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
Yes they did. Tell me that this is a male texture. I dare you.
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
Does this really appear to be a male texture to you?
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
Hot Coffee was on the GTA:SA disk, the topless textures are on the Oblivion disk. Both require mods to access. Same thing.
Nope, not a male texture, topless *female* textures are *also* included in the game...
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
See for yourself.
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
Wrong, and once again.. does this look male to you?
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
No it's not the male texture.
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
Does this look even remotely male?
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
This is not the case, and just in case I'm terribly confused, being a blonde woman and all, but it sure looks like it has nipples to me.
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
No, they're not male. I'm not sure where this rumor started, but I think it was on some forum where I read a message that was saying Bethesda should lie and say it was actually the male texture used on the female mesh.
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
Sure doesn't look male to me.
Sorry no, you are wrong. It's NOT a male texture.. well, unless you can call this...
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
anything like male.
You do not understand correctly. It is third party unlocking of content that shipped on the disk.
How does crap like this uninformed drivel get modded 5? Mod parent down please, as it's spreading misinformation.
At least, if what I found is really what it appears to be...
/ 05/oblivion-nude-texture.jpg
http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006
Looks pretty female to me. I was getting tired of all the "it's a male upper body texture mapped to the female mesh" talk and decided to dig a little bit.. not that it took that much digging, but anyways, there it is, supposedly the base texture in question.
I have seen no evidence that the file was for the male character. The only place I've seen it talked about was by people saying that they read somewhere that it was. Bethesda even admits there was the nude female texture (as that is what it was being referred to), and hasn't said anything about it being for the male. In fact, *I* read on a forum that it was because Bethesda had at first the idea to put some topless dancing girls in and that is where the texture originated. They later decided to pull that but didn't remove the texture. So I would think that seems more logical, therefore the mesh is NOT from a male.
I don't think it's hypocracy at all. I think it was a simple mistake (well, maybe not that simple, but a mistake nevertheless). My feeling all along has been that the re-rating was mainly about the amount/level of gore that the ESRB claims not to have been aware of, and that the nipple incedent is just one more thing on top of that, but not the deciding factor. I think the media has been a big factor in making it seem like that is so. In fact, the 360 version is being re-rated also, and specifically due to gore since, at least atm everyone seems to actually believe ms's claim that it won't be modded.. hehe... that'll be so fun to watch when it happens. Note that was not an "if", but a "when".
So all this hoopla ya'll are stirring up about being re-rated due to nipples instead of violence are doing nothing but feeding that media hype machine that regurgitates it. Truth of the matter is that it's violence and gore that got the game re-rated, as told by the ESRB when they re-rated the 360 version.
It bugs me to no end that all you people that think you're so great and technically superior to the avg human being can't read and comprehend an article worth a shit. I mean, in the articles it says...
"Our raters re-reviewed the game along with the more extreme depictions of blood and gore that ESRB uncovered and felt that the game was deserving of a Mature rating. Though Bethesda may believe their submission was 'full, accurate and comprehensive,' our investigation proved otherwise, forcing us to correct what was found to be an inaccurate rating."
and...
"The content causing the ESRB to change the rating involves more detailed depictions of blood and gore than were considered in the original rating, as well as the presence of a locked-out art file or 'skin' that, if accessed through a third party modification to the PC version of the game, allows the user to play with topless versions of female characters,"
How to you get to the consensus shown here of being so prudely that the display of a nipple changes the rating rather than the gore, when it's quite clear in the articles that, to the ESRB it was indeed the ultra-violence that prompted the ratings change? I can see that this gets clouded a bit, as it's obvious the reporters of the article seem to be clouding the issue by hyping the nude bit, but that's obviously a much smaller issue than the violence when you actually read the words from the ESRB.
And here we have yet another clueless loser getting his jollies by showing the world that he hasn't the first idea what the issue actually is.