Nudity

[Minq]

You're right, its not a big deal, considering. But why risk alienating those who think it is and potentially garnering a mature rating? If its not a big deal, just through on panties to appease those who think it is.

 

[Sakonosolo]

This isn't even going to be a fully published game, like getting submitted to the ESRB and stuff, anyway is it? I can't say I've heard of any of these Kickstarter games going through that. So I don't think anyone has to worry about ratings and bannings. And even then, it's non-sexual nudity, which I don't think has ever gotten a game banned anywhere. In places like Germany and Australia it's mostly violence that does it.

I'm all for nudity in this game. I think it would be cool to try and complete a nude run, especially if NPCs react to it.

 

[mcmanusaur]

No, I won't acknowledge such a thing.
I can see many practical reasons to include nudity:

1. It's natural to be nude when you have no clothes on. Fact.

Not a practical reason. And this is more of a reason against not including it than a reason to include it, which is what I'm after (there is a difference).

2. One would be able to examine wounds on your body, if there are any more permanent injuries on your character. Those wounds would be hidden from sight by your clothes. Maybe you'd even need to take, for example, your shirt off to apply salve or medicine to those wounds. Smearing them on clothers doesn't do much-

We'd have to learn more about how Sui Generis models injuries before we can decide if this "reason" is at all relevant. At the moment it's nothing more than pure speculation.

3. Earn an extra income as model for artists. Take off your clothes, let someone draw a beautiful painting, support art, get paid. Yay!

Bleh. Call me a prude or an elitist or whatever, but I think one has to be a special kind of person if that is the sort of thing one chooses to "roleplay" (put that as kindly as I could). At any rate, this is another instance of baseless speculation since we have no knowledge to suggest this will be in the game.

4. Using your very own "argument(s)" to bribe someone. "Will you let me past if I give you a peek?".

Same as above. Personally I don't ascribe to the "if all else fails I have the ability to objectify my character and utilize their sex appeal" school of roleplaying, but that's just me. Again, the presence of such a mechanic would need to be confirmed before this justifies the inclusion of nudity. I don't mean to offend anyone with this, but it is just that these are the exact kinds of things that give video games their immature reputation; maybe if we stopped treating them like our little place to do all the things that are taboo in real life, then we would be taken more seriously.

5. Swimming works much better when you don't wear panties that get soaked up by water (linen and wool do that alot) and become extremely heavy. The less clothing (and armour!), the better you can swim. Oh, and AFTER swimming is even worse, you'll most definitely catch a cold if you keep those wet pants on all night.

Again, something that seems unlikely to be simulated in the game. Yes, we can always make up scenarios in which nudity (or any other feature for that matter) would have some practical effect, but the relevance of those scenarios to the game in question must be established before they mean anything. I will refer you to what was actually my first post in this thread, which states "I haven't seen anything about SG that seems to suggest nudity has a role" or something along those lines.

6. Back in the medieval periods, women wore only a dress as undergarment. No bra, no panties. Men wore pants, breeches to be exact. A bra, panties and corsage for woman have been excavated, but they are dated to the very late medieval period.

I'm not challenging this, but I'd be curious to see a source here. Anyway, not a "practical" reason to include nudity in a video game context.

7. If you rob a person and take his clothes, why the heck would have any clothes left? What if YOU are robbed and left for dead by bandits? Believe they'd be so nice to leave you anything? I think not.

Again, not a "practical" (in the sense that this would really affect gameplay) reason for the inclusion of nudity.

8. Immersion. What are those magic panties I can't take off? This is NOT the immersion a physics based world deserves.

Same as above.

Just because YOU don't see any practical reason to include nudity doesn't mean there isn't.

And I'm still waiting for such a practical reason that's demonstrably relevant to Sui Generis, given our current knowledge of the game.

I'll go even further and claim if the only things a person can think about when they think nudity is immature shenanigans, that says alot about the person and their perception of nudity itself, and video games.

To clarify, that's the only thing I can think of regarding nudity in video games, not regarding nudity in general. That's a pretty big distinction. At any rate, this is because I have not witnessed a single instance of nudity in video games (outside of cutscenes during which the player has no control, perhaps) that has not engendered immaturity more than anything else. Ideally, the gaming community would be ready to step their maturity up a notch, but given that there are still so many people apparently clamoring in favor of nudity for nudity's sake, I suspect that this is not the case.

Without making any assumptions or accusations regarding the age of anyone participating in this thread, the whole push for nudity things comes off as a reactionary "don't censor mature stuff from us, we're grown up enough to make our own choices" attitude, which is generally associated with teenagers who only end up proving why such things should in fact be censored after all. Ah well, in the end it's up to the developers, and like I said before I don't have a problem with them deciding to include it; I just think there's a remarkable lack of valid arguments as to why it must be included.

 

[Tony]

At any rate, this is because I have not witnessed a single instance of nudity in video games (outside of cutscenes during which the player has no control, perhaps) that has not engendered immaturity more than anything else. Ideally, the gaming community would be ready to step their maturity up a notch, but given that there are still so many people apparently clamoring in favor of nudity for nudity's sake, I suspect that this is not the case. Without making any assumptions or accusations regarding the age of anyone participating in this thread, the whole push for nudity things comes off as a reactionary "don't censor mature stuff from us, we're grown up enough to make our own choices" attitude, which is generally associated with teenagers who only end up proving why such things should in fact be censored after all. Ah well, in the end it's up to the developers, and like I said before I don't have a problem with them deciding to include it; I just think there's a remarkable lack of valid arguments as to why it must be included.

So you thought when the guard was looted and left naked in the recently released video that this was done in an immature fashion? I didn't get that vibe at all from watching the video. To me it just seemed natural and normal for someone who had just been plundered to be left with nothing. Especially since the character was trying to imitate the guard and so they took every piece of clothing.

Giving people options, choice and freedom in Sui Generis seems to be the general philosophy behind the game. If someone has something that you want and if you are capable and willing to kill them then you should be able to take it. This isn't adding nudity for the sake of immaturity. It's maintaining the same consistency that Bare Mettle is applying to the rest of the game. They want things to work and function properly. They want to avoid things that remind you that you are just playing a game. Clothing that is glued to your skin is one of those reminders.

 

[mcmanusaur]

So you thought when the guard was looted and left naked in the recently released video that this was done in an immature fashion? I didn't get that vibe at all from watching the video. To me it just seemed natural and normal for someone who had just been plundered to be left with nothing. Especially since the character was trying to imitate the guard and so they took every piece of clothing.

Giving people options, choice and freedom in Sui Generis seems to be the general philosophy behind the game. If someone has something that you want and if you are capable and willing to kill them then you should be able to take it. This isn't adding nudity for the sake of immaturity. It's maintaining the same consistency that Bare Mettle is applying to the rest of the game. They want things to work and function properly. They want to avoid things that remind you that you are just playing a game. Clothing that is glued to your skin is one of those reminders.

Those issues generally begin when you hand nudity over to the players, and I remain quite skeptical that this "clothing that is glued to your skin" aspect is really as immersion-breaking for people as they claim it to be. What, all those times that you really needed your character naked for something (whatever it may be, I don't know). that was a huge roadblock wasn't it?

 

[Tony]

Those issues generally begin when you hand nudity over to the players, and I remain quite skeptical that this "clothing that is glued to your skin" aspect is really as immersion-breaking for people as they claim it to be. What, all those times that you really needed your character naked for something (whatever it may be, I don't know). that was a huge roadblock wasn't it?

If I killed someone and they were wearing something which I couldn't take because it was permanently attached then yes, it would instantly break immersion and I'd think "silly game mechanics". You seem to be hung up on the idea of getting naked in order to perform actions. I'm simply saying things should work in a logical fashion. Bare Mettle should keep the same philosophy they are using to design the rest of the game. Why make an exception?

 

[mcmanusaur]

If I killed someone and they were wearing something which I couldn't take because it was permanently attached then yes, it would instantly break immersion and I'd think "silly game mechanics". You seem to be hung up on the idea of getting naked in order to perform actions. I'm simply saying things should work in a logical fashion. Bare Mettle should keep the same philosophy they are using to design the rest of the game. Why make an exception?

Right, and this would come to your attention all of those times that you find yourself really needing to remove the underwear from a corpse, am I right? Unless it is relevant to the game, it shouldn't be more immersion-breaking than any other case of limited simulation, such as not being able to weave a basket. "But logically, as a human with functioning hands and the correct materials, I should be able to craft a basket!" These kinds of exclusions happen all the time in every single game, and the real question here is "why should nudity (which hasn't been demonstrated to be particularly relevant to Sui Generis in any way) be treated as an exception to this?" If there's no indication that nudity will serve any specific purpose, then it should be excluded along with every other feature that fails to serve any specific purpose, regardless of how "logical" such features would be.

 

[malfunction]

Honestly, all arguments aside, the real stickler in here is the rating.

I have nothing against nudity in games. In fact, I think it CAN be done very tastefully, and that the rules perhaps shouldn't be so harsh on nudity when they're comparatively quite lenient on violence. Same for drug usage, which often carries a hefty rating blow too just for depicting people smoking weed or whatever.

But the fact remains that the rating WILL affect the sales of the game and it's hardly the job of a startup indie developer to go all out and try to change them. It just simply isn't worth it.

As mcmanusaur has argued, there's very little practical purpose for nudity to exist in the game beyond the "peace of mind" that you are able to remove people's undergarments after you murder them, even if you'll never have a reason to do that besides satisfying your own... curiosities

There's pretty much nothing you can do with nudity that you couldn't do with undergarments. Wanna leave an unconscious enemy to die in the snow? It's not gonna make that much of a difference if you take off their bra or not.

And anyway, just mod it in later. Seriously.

This isn't even going to be a fully published game, like getting submitted to the ESRB and stuff, anyway is it? I can't say I've heard of any of these Kickstarter games going through that. So I don't think anyone has to worry about ratings and bannings. And even then, it's non-sexual nudity, which I don't think has ever gotten a game banned anywhere. In places like Germany and Australia it's mostly violence that does it.

http://www.baremettle.com/sg/forums/index.php?threads/will-this-game-be-shown-off.967/#post-9751

ESRB ratings can still be important even if you're not selling your game through some publisher or through physical vendors. A lower rating is better when showing your game off at booths and such, and I think you need a rating to be placed on steam and a few other services.

The point is, if I were giving advice to the developers, I'd probably caution them against including nudity, purely because the potential repercussions might be wider than you imagine. I, for one, want to be able to play this game in Australia. Of course I'd support whatever choice the developers end up making since it's up to them whether they want to take that risk, but I wouldn't.

 

[Tony]

Right, and this would come to your attention all of those times that you find yourself really needing to remove the underwear from a corpse, am I right? Unless it is relevant to the game, it shouldn't be more immersion-breaking than any other case of limited simulation, such as not being able to weave a basket. "But logically, as a human with functioning hands and the correct materials, I should be able to craft a basket!" These kinds of exclusions happen all the time in every single game, and the real question here is "why should nudity (which hasn't been demonstrated to be particularly relevant to Sui Generis in any way) be treated as an exception to this?" If there's no indication that nudity will serve any specific purpose, then it should be excluded along with every other feature that fails to serve any specific purpose, regardless of how "logical" such features would be.

Did you not watch the video showing the guard having his clothing removed which resulted in a naked corpse? This is a very practical application which does involve regular gameplay mechanics (looting a corpse). Weaving a basket is not a practical application if it is not something that pertains to actual gameplay. I would not stop in the middle of combat to weave a basket. This is not a logical thing to do.

Modern underwear was not worn in a medieval setting. So again, it would look out of place seeing modern underwear permanently attached to a character. This is why the guard was left naked when you looted his clothing. If a character should be naked because of their circumstance then this is logical. If a character has clothing permanently attached when circumstance dictates they should not then this is illogical. I hope Bare Mettle sticks with the current design instead of adding illogical mechanics that constantly remind the player that it is just a game.

 

[Rob]

Also, Oona please give me another example of something that has no practical application yet should be included in a game. It seems to me that people want nudity to be an exception in this regard.

Hi mcmanusaur, you've responded to Elric's suggestions regarding practical applications of nudity, but did you miss my above suggestion that it could be used to alter gameplay, allowing inventive solutions to problems:

I can imagine that nudity could be built into the game in a way that has practical application. For example, if you run down the street naked then I can imagine that people are going to respond to you very differently to if you are fully clothed! Furthermore, if you manage to somehow steal someone's clothes, then they won't be able to go about their routine patrol (for example) for fear of embarrassing themselves in public. Ok, so this sort of stuff may never make it into Sui Generis, but anyway there's a couple of examples of how it could be used in principle.

Don't you agree that that counts as a potential practical application?

There's pretty much nothing you can do with nudity that you couldn't do with undergarments. Wanna leave an unconscious enemy to die in the snow? It's not gonna make that much of a difference if you take off their bra or not.

Well suppose you've come across an abandoned village that's been burned to the ground, clearly having been attacked days/weeks before by a raping and pillaging raiding party. It makes sense that some of the people that are left on the floor are going to be a bit naked. The aggressors might have done that purposefully in order to dehumanize their victims, taking away their dignity thus reducing them to something weak and pathetic. Furthermore, the naked people left on top of spiked poles for the crows to peck at would be left there as a reminder, a message left to instill fear in the hearts of wanderers that might happen upon the village (such as yourself, the character). If everyone had undergarments stuck to them in such a scenario, it would look out of place, and, as @Tony says, would be a constant reminder that you're just in a game.

If films do it, why shouldn't games? Games such as this aren't made for children.

Without making any assumptions or accusations regarding the age of anyone participating in this thread, the whole push for nudity things comes off as a reactionary "don't censor mature stuff from us, we're grown up enough to make our own choices" attitude, which is generally associated with teenagers who only end up proving why such things should in fact be censored after all.

I can see where you're coming from, but I'm pretty sure that that's not the case in this instance. On the contrary, to be honest. I would usually associate teenagers with making a big deal out of it, drawing it to the forefront and getting hung up on it.

And anyway, just mod it in later. Seriously.

That's exactly what I'm concerned about. The last thing I want is for someone to mod it in later. If it was modded in, it would probably not be tasteful, and there would probably be a big thing made about it, like it was something special. I'd much rather BM just put it in tastefully and have control over it, and sweep it under the carpet like it's not a big issue. Which it's not. People shouldn't get so hung up about it IMO.

 

[mcmanusaur]

Did you not watch the video showing the guard having his clothing removed which resulted in a naked corpse? This is a very practical application which does involve regular gameplay mechanics (looting a corpse). Weaving a basket is not a practical application if it is not something that pertains to actual gameplay. I would not stop in the middle of combat to weave a basket. This is not a logical thing to do.

Looting a corpse's underwear is not practical, no. The rest of their clothes for the purpose of a disguise, perhaps, but I don't see why underwear contributes to a disguise. Except maybe a corset, and that's pushing it in terms of how specific such a scenario is.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't stop in the middle of combat to remove my own clothes, to remove the clothes of another person, or to weave a basket, and that's the point.

I hope Bare Mettle sticks with the current design instead of adding illogical mechanics that constantly remind the player that it is just a game.

This statement just becomes more ridiculous every time. If non-removable underwear "constantly reminds" you so that you are in a game, then there's probably something wrong with the way you're trying to play the game, lol... personally underwear never enters into my mind when I'm playing an action RPG, but that's just me. Dress-up games are different.

 

[mcmanusaur]

Hi mcmanusaur, you've responded to Elric's suggestions regarding practical applications of nudity, but did you miss my above suggestion that it could be used to alter gameplay, allowing inventive solutions to problems:

I can imagine that nudity could be built into the game in a way that has practical application. For example, if you run down the street naked then I can imagine that people are going to respond to you very differently to if you are fully clothed! Furthermore, if you manage to somehow steal someone's clothes, then they won't be able to go about their routine patrol (for example) for fear of embarrassing themselves in public. Ok, so this sort of stuff may never make it into Sui Generis, but anyway there's a couple of examples of how it could be used in principle.

Don't you agree that that counts as a potential practical application?

Yes, but this is something that can and has been implemented in games that feature permanent underwear (take Morrowind, whose NPCs react to underwear-clad characters, for example). Addiitionally, I don't think it is the most compelling reason for the inclusion of a feature- it seems slightly symptomatic of the whole "all NPCs must always respond to and validate the player's actions" approach, which tends to result in NPCs who don't have any agency of their own- but that said, yes, this is a potential practical application of nudity. In the same way, streaking during field invasions is a potential practical application of nudity in FIFA or Madden; it's just a question of whether this is something we're likely to see in the game. "If P then Q" doesn't prove Q until P has already been substantiated, and again like I said this is something that can easily be implemented for underwear without nudity being included.

If everyone had undergarments stuck to them in such a scenario, it would look out of place, and, as @Tony says, would be a constant reminder that you're just in a game.

For me it simply would achieve the same end goal in a slightly less intense and explicit manner, and again nudity (and the need thereof in a video game) is just not nearly ubiquitous enough to serve as a "constant" immersion breaker, in comparison to other aspects of all games' limitations.

If films do it, why shouldn't games? Games such as this aren't made for children.

Well, again, films do not feature any form of interactivity, and handing stuff like this over to players is when the problems start to arise, in general. The sad truth is simply that- knowing gamers from years of experience- the majority of players will use it for more or less immature ends.

I can see where you're coming from, but I'm pretty sure that that's not the case in this instance. On the contrary, to be honest. I would usually associate teenagers with making a big deal out of it, drawing it to the forefront and getting hung up on it.

To me, if they include it then that's fine, and if they don't then that's fine too. But apparently we have threads and posts asking for and requesting its inclusion, and there seems to be more people hung-up on the idea of it being censored than people who are hung up on the idea that its inclusion is inherently offensive.

That's exactly what I'm concerned about. The last thing I want is for someone to mod it in later. If it was modded in, it would probably not be tasteful, and there would probably be a big thing made about it, like it was something special. I'd much rather BM just put it in tastefully and have control over it, and sweep it under the carpet like it's not a big issue. Which it's not. People shouldn't get so hung up about it IMO.

People will mod in distasteful things either way, in all likelihood. Again, I'm fine with whatever Bare Mettle decides to do, but I think it's sort of funny we have this thread, and I don't think there have been too many valid arguments (on either side really, yet we seem to have many people who are passionate about wanting nudity to be included).

 

[Elric von Rabenfels]

A question comes to mind...

SG is still mainly a singleplayer game.

How can nudity, if included, be inherently offensive in any way, if it's up to the player to "utilise" it in such ways?

If it's just plain nudity, the plain reality of that every piece of clothing worn can be taken off, it's not offensive at all. It's just natural nudity of people being naked when they put their clothes off.

The characters aren't doing -anything- immature or offensive by themselves. The PLAYER would have to make the characters do immature things. And a player that does that would certainly NOT be offended by it.

But players that WOULD be offended by it are safe - it's NOT a multiplayer game (maybe coop with friends if at all), so there would be no common place, no way or room for the immature player to bother the... conservative player.

There would be no way for a player to bother others with running around nude and doing immature things.
If anything, they could upload videos with immature actions, but people offended by that could simply decide to not watch them. But whatever a person decides to do, it's their decision to do what they want in THEIR game, and it's confined to THEIR game.

I don't see -any- substance to the argument of "People might get offended".
Nobody can force their way to utilise the features of the game on others.

So if a little thing like having unremovable clothing BOTHERS many of us, destroys the immersion for some of us, and is downright WEIRD and ILLOGICAL to alot of us, since it's a purely artificial limitation - Then I don't see ANY argument against just deciding in favour of all-clothes-removable. It makes many of us happy, and it bothers NO ONE. NO ONE is forced to remove the underwear of their character. NO ONE is forced to see another character streaking. And even if people decide to be immature people and do silly stuff with that option, so be it - they won't be able to bother anyone else with it. They're just doing it in their game.

Summary:
I'm in favour of nudity and every piece of clothing to be removable.

1. It would enhance the immersion for many of us
2. It would not bother anyone as no one is FORCED to be nude. Don't like nudity? Just keep those panties on*
3. It would give immature people another way to vent sexual frustration without bothering anyone

*This goes for looting as well - don't want to leave naked people scattered across the map? Just don't loot their underwear.

 

[fluffydino2000]

I think what this boils down to is that some people like things like nudity in games so that they don't loose immersion and that they don't feel patronised. People who are offended by that can check the "Pixel-ate nudity" box and it won't bother them. The rating won't change if this is the case in the game, and if it does in some regions then the option can be removed in the version for those regions.

I don't see what more can be said on the issue. If the people in "no nude" regions need the immersion, they can go into the config file and change a value. Or, they can buy the game from a different region.

 

[Sakonosolo]

The ratings boards are weird. Like GTA SA got an AO rating because of a minigame, that wasn't even all that bad, that wasn't available through normal gameplay. And I think I heard that Oblivion's rating was affected because you could mod naked models in. Either way I still don't think this game is going to be submitted to the ESBR.

 

[lvk]

@mcmanusaur, I can't help but feel that, like myself, you liked Skyrim and expected great things out of the modding community and were met with a whole lot of disappointment. I may well be wrong, but if I were to share your opinion, it would have been a result of a large part of Skyrim's modding community.

 

[Scarecrow]

Too me, i don't really care if it's included or not to be honest, it's nothing too important to me. However, i can see the use of nudity in this way; It helps sets the mood. In Game of Thrones for instance, does a lot of the nudity/sex scene serve an important "practical" purpose? No, in most cases it does not. However, it helps to set the mood of a mature, gritty, and grim world. It can be used to a similar effect in Sui Generis. The vibes I'm getting of the setting in the game is just this; Mature, gritty and grim. That is the best reason i can think of, and honestly i think it is a good and valid one. No, it would not be the same if they left their underpants or bra's on. It wouldn't add to such a mood in an equally effective way.

Other than that, i think there are some good arguments in here. But again, it isn't the most important thing in the world.

 

[Minq]

Yeah, its not the most important thing in the world. I'll play the game either way. I'd just rather not see a naked eunuched dude every time I loot someone.

 

[cosmo bozo]

I do wonder how the realism argument fits in with looting armour, I mean, killing people then taking their clothes off, and carrying them round with you...realistic?
The combat advantage of wearing armour would be entirely negated by the fact that you were staggering around lugging a spare suit with you...
I can see the point of taking it for a disguise, like the video however...

 

[lvk]

I do wonder how the realism argument fits in with looting armour, I mean, killing people then taking their clothes off, and carrying them round with you...realistic?
The combat advantage of wearing armour would be entirely negated by the fact that you were staggering around lugging a spare suit with you...

I think if you take someone else's suit of armor, you'd wear theirs and eventually leave your own somewhere, be it on the ground or in a house, and maybe not re-engage in combat until you've done so if the extra armor's weight factors in. I also don't imagine someone'd dress up a corpse with their old clothes.