The reason why you cannot kill kids in Fallout 3

Fallout 3 has received an M rating and would therefore may contain almost anything, the game is meant for adults and not for minors. After a lengthy discussion, the Fallout 3 developers decided that you can not kill children. Click on read more to find out why.

[Deviant]

Actually they've said :"We do not want to cross lines like killing kids (we never actually got as far as just putting kids kill-able in any builds or The Game)"

They've never discussed anything.

[KRUSSIDULL]

Is there even a game you can kill kids at? Always been wondering why there isnt any kids in GTA or Saints Row.

[shazam]

why kill kids in fallout 3 when you can kill them in real life?

[yamamoto114]

Ever think that it might have been something they discussed before beginning any actual work on the game? *roll eyes*

[LightningPS3PS3]

I hate censorship. Nothing crosses the line, because anything that exists in real life is part of reality. There is never a need to censor, never.

Kids die in real life, they die of cancer, they are born ill. Kids die all the time. They die if an American fighter jet bombs their house in Iraq.

Okay! kids die! Because life is real and kids are a part of life. And life doesn't take it easy on kids. Cancer and other illnesses don't say "Hey it's a poor kid"

If if it happends in life, it should happen in a video game. People don't have the right to hide anything. Censorship is never the answer, nobody has that right. Someone who censors is trying to be above life. And they aren't and just because you hide something, doesn't change what real life is.

I'm sick of how society just wants to protect kids like hypocritic b*tches. Kids are a part of life and they do die. Nothing they do, will make this not be true.

[JsonHenry]

You can kill kids in the first two Fallout Games..

[Beast_Master]

There is a big difference between censorship and decency. Look at Bioshock you can kill children and no one cares because it is in the context of evil, it is different. The developers didn't make kids killable not because they wanted to or felt pressured not to. They did it because of their own moral standing. This isn't even an issue of outside forces making developers not make the game they want to make. Take your soap-box else-where.

[shawnsl65]

kid's wouldn't die by gunshot in the face if freaks and sickos like you didn't exist. HS shooting ring a bell anyone? Where'd they get the idea, oh that's right GTA. There're some sick sick people out there that would actually incorporate a game into real life. So not everyone is a SANE player. That's why devs don't put this type of sh1t in game.

[Kingsora]

They have to discuss it before making a decision :P

[shqype]

I can understand why they would do that, but in MY game I would definitely allow the killing of children. I don't believe in censorship, and feel in such an experience a person should be allowed to do (in the game) anything that would be possible to do in real life: killing children included.

[DavidMacDougall]

The end of Bioshock where you need to protect the child i keep loading it everytime she died even tho it dont matter if she did ,there is something not right being able to kill kids in videogames there are to many weirdos in the world

[Amnesiac]

LOL @ the Bioshock reference...

Didn't you listen to Atlas?

"Would you kindly lower that weapon...

...You think that's a child down there?"

[shawnsl65]

hope the authorities put you on their "potential child murdering" list using IP tracker to track your ass down sicko

[Yi-Long]

... when you pretend to have a free-roaming, sand-box kinda game, or when it just fits the setting and your abilities to do so.

When I play a game set in a large city, I expect to see people of all ages and all walks of life. So young and old, black and white, pretty and ugly, etc etc. And if I can kill the healthy white man, and I can run over the adult black woman, why wouldnt I be able to smash some kid's head in with a baseballbat!?

Does that mean I would ever do such a thing in real life? Does that mean I enjoy violence, or violence against kids? Does it make me a bad person? No, no, and probably no. I just dont want MY gameplay-experience limited because of someone else's 'morals and values'.
When I play a game, I wanna be able to do what I want against who I want. So when I can shoot certain kinds of people, and the game is set in a certain setting that would also provide for children, pets, old people, disabled people, etc... I want those also in the game, and I just want the game to provide me the freedom to do what I want to them.

It's a gameplay thing, it's a realisme thing, it's an anti-censorship thing.

Actually, I think it would make some people think more about what we do in a game. Why is it that we dont feel 'bad' about killing a regular guy in a videogame, but suddenly it's 'taboo' to kill a kid!?

Either way, it's a touchy subject and I can understand developers shying away from including it... mostly because of all the bad press it will obviously be thrown upon the game, with populistic politicians and newsanchors crying outrage etc... but I do feel we need to make those extra steps when we want to further the videogame industry into proper maturity.

Think about movies with violence against kids, or innocent women etc.

[Deviant]

have to disagree.
Killing kids goes to far and isnt needed at all to enjoy a game ( and if u think it is needed ..well)

[ravinash]

I think its fine to be able to kill kids if there are repercussions for it. Like if you did, no one will want to have anything to do with you. And people will come after you.

[wallace1000]

I think i am with Deviant on this one, being able to kill kids wouldn't add anything to the game. Unless you are a very strange individual that would enjoy that.

[Darrius Cole]

Depict the killing of children. The movie may tell you that it happened, but they never actually show it. They youngest person that you will see get killed in an American movie, TV show, or comic is an adolescent that has clearly begun their child-bearing years.

The Devs cut child-killing because it would generate a storm of bad press against an indefensible position. Their is nothing that devs could say to justify the need for depicting the killing of children. Their games would be "voluntarily" pulled from every shelf in almost every store in the country.

P.S.

For old-fashioned people, like me, who know that all healthy men, whether they realize it or not, are hard-wired to protect women and children it matter who you kill in a game. There is no shock or sense of taboo in killing an adult man. There is more emotional involvement when the game depicts the killing of an adult women. If the woman is innocent you get a greater sense of being a bully and a more evil character; if the woman is evil you get a greater sense of being a strict administrator of justice. The emotional involvement in the killing of children is so extreme as to be unjustifiable and unbearable.

[propheta]

I'm sorry, but this is a question of social acceptance. The life of a Human Being has the same value, whether we talk of a young boy, an old lady, a 5 month baby or a 66 year old man. There are protective instincts, but remember that in our society, children suffer greatly from physical and sexual abuse. It's a double-edge sword: we love children instinctively, but they are also easy targets for domestic violence and sexual perversion

I think that it is a great hypocrisy, making the death of adults something acceptable in a videogame to the point that most of these sandbox games focus on killing representations of people that wander through the virtual spaces. In GTA, I am able to kill a teenager, an adult or even an old lady crossing the road with her shopping bags. How is this any more acceptable than, say, running over a 12 year old child?

I, for one, disagree with the abusive use of death in a videogame to a point where death is devoid of any impact or consequence. Most of the so-called “sandbox” titles turn death into something of a requirement so that you can exist in that space. In FPS you interact with the surrounding world making use of a gun, because killing is the objective. Death becomes meaningless. So if you tell me that killing a child on a videogame has some impact, well, maybe that’s because it has never been used before in a commercial game. But please remember that killing an adult was something awful and intolerable before it became standard in most videogames – especially north-American videogames, for some reason.

I won’t be surprised if, in the future, a videogame will be including this sort of contents: and surely it will be followed by many others to a point where killing children also becomes standard in videogames.

So that’s why I laugh at these statements: like these videogame creators had any moral or ethics?! They only avoid this sort of content because it would be prejudicial, bad publicity would fall on them, harsh criticisms, and the game sales would suffer. But, on the other hand, if it meant more dollars, I bet you that they’d include child deaths in the game: they’d make them as violent as they could to sell a few more copies.

If you want a sandbox game that was made by people with values, go play Shenmue: a treaty on how to make free exploration games, with a world and a society around the player with which you can interact, instead of just “approach and kill”.

[Yi-Long]

... first of all, I'm not saying the ability to kill kids and elderly people and disabled people etc in a game, would be FUN, or SHOULD be fun. I CAN be fun, for some I guess, but that's not the argument why I think it should be in the game.

Let's have a game like GTA4: realistic setting, mature story, adult rating. It's set in a huge city, and gives you the freedom to do what you want. Right? In a huge city you would also come across kids, elderly peeps, disabled people, etc. Right!?
If we're gonna pretend we have a realistic mature game in a realistic setting that allows total (moral) freedom, shouldnt you at least be able to be a complete bastard as well!?

I think so.

But I can understand why people have moral objections about it, however hypocritical they are.

So let's give another example. Let's say we have a new Vietnam shooter, set in the asian jungle. At that time, and this is historical factual, there were also kids fighting on behalf of the vietcong (ofcourse). We read this in the books, we see this in the movies. Why shouldnt we see this in a videogame!?

See, borderline decision, right!? Still a kid, but a kid with a gun in his hands to kill you (you, the evil american intruder that came into HIS life uninvited and killed half his family).

I'm not saying there are lots of movies and books include the graphic depiction of violence/murder against kids. But there are more than a few, and we have come to accept and respect that, as it's part of mature storytelling in a mature medium, aimed at a mature audience.

Games also will need to make those steps into further maturity.

And please dont mistake violence in videogames with real-life violence. I am CRAZY about ALL animals. I LITERALLY wouldnt hurt a fly, I carry spiders outside instead of smashing them, I pet every cat I come across, and I feed the ducks behind the house almost every day. That being said, I LOVE CHICK'NKICK'N in Fable! It's just a completely different thing. The emotions behind it all are WAY different.
I can enjoy shooting a guy right in the face when it's in a videogame, but in real life, it's a whole lot less fun as it seems! So I dont do that. I dont even have any wish or aspirations to ever do so.

So many gamers HERE are hypocritical. When it comes to virtual violence in videogames, pretty much every gamer agrees it doesnt make gamers more violent or turn them bad or whatever. However, when we're talking about virtual violence against KIDS in a videogames, half the gamers suddenly say it's OTT and it's evil and bad etc.

Another argument made is that it doesnt 'enhance the fun'. Maybe not, but does it have to? And IF that's the case, why do we still get outraged when companies censor their games to exclude blood, or make fatalities appear offscreen, or change the color of blood!?

When you would have told me 10 years ago I would one day enjoy strolling around a medieval village kicking sweet animals around with a smile on my face, and enjoying it, I probably would have had my doubts. Now, I know I can enjoy that little additional freedom in a game, and STILL love animals with all my heart. Weird how that works, ey!?

Back to the start: We want games to 'mature'!? Then offer us REALISTIC settings and freedoms when it comes to moral decisions like this.

edit: final point I would like to make.
How these kind of things are adressed in games, is obviously in the hands of the developers. And just as with movies, you'll have cheap exploitation of it, and you will have masterpieces which will really include these moral decisions into a big difficult story which will have an emotional impact in the player. That will thus differ from game to game.
Look at movies: You have cheap slasher movies with kids horribly cut open and exploding, and you have revengeflicks where you see a kid getting murdered so you can relate to the victim's friend/dad/mother/whatever search for revenge, and you have movies like where kids pose a threat and you have no other option but to take them out, etc etc. So it's all about the context in which this is all set.

[Captain Tuttle]

You could kill kids in the first 2 games but there were pretty severe consequences...the bounty hunters that came after you became so tough towards the end that you couldn't survive. Gaming was much less mainstream back then though...I can see why the took kid killing out of this version.

Groin shots on the other hand should have been left in.

[Kingsora]

Actually I don't see the fun in killing kids...

[shawnsl65]

wow someone actually disagreed with you. he/she or it must be twisted in the head.

[Chuck Norris]

It received an 'M' rating; they might as well go all out.

[shovelbum]

I actually grew attached to my two rugrats in the game until Lucian wiped them out. As for killing children in the game, like most of you I could care less either way. I would not do it personally but it's a game and as long as the feeble mind of the gamer playing it is consciously aware of that fact then he/she should be able to do so with safety off. I did however save all the little sisters and not harvest them so that's where my moral compass points.

[navyguy21]

why is there even a discussion on whether to kill kids or not? seems like an obvious answer to me. It takes a cold S.O.B to kill a child............even if it IS just a game!!! It sickens me that they took time to even think about it :-(

[ravinash]

while I can under stand your view, the point of the game is to make its as real and detailed experience as possible.
If there was an explosion and everyone but the kids get killed, thats not what would happen. so this would take away from the effect.
Of course the best thing is to avoid the situation where there are kids there at all.

[navyguy21]

so why not script it so that women and children are evacuated?? dont they also do that in real life? or why not have the children in a different place where they maybe just get an injury? I dont care what the purpose is, or how "real" you wannna make a game, the is simply NO EXCUSE for killing children in games, life, comic books, anime, or anything else........PERIOD!

[Ridrick]

Thats what I loved in Fallout 2, you could do whatever you like.

If I wanted to wipe out everyone in City, here we go, I equipped Bozar and turned everyone into 'mangled heap', including kids, no excuse.

Game was packed with black humour. Anyone tried to pickpicket victim and put into his inventory armed bomb ? Sweet and full of fun.

BTW, best weapon for kids - flamethrower. 'Walkers' Ready Salted :)

[Captain Tuttle]

You can pick pocket a grenade onto someone in Fallout 3. I think there's an Achievement for it actually.

[Ridrick]

Good to know :)

Im hoping they kept spirit of original Fallout games. Picking it up tommorow so Ill find out.

[no_more_trolling]

well u get nothing out of killing kids. thats just sick. ur sick if u would want to see kids get killed. the game is still a beautiful game. killing of kids is just wrong. but killing men and women are just fine. ^_^

[Legionaire2005]

Games like Deus Ex Invisible war(original Xbox)gave you the ability to kill kids in one level. The game Prey had a evil spirit girl kill a little boy in one scene of the game. Those games are still around today yet no one reported that in the game, maybe because they were not that popular.

[cpuchess]

Any game that allows the killing of innocent children should be discouraged. I know if it had been included I certainly wouldn't buy it. If a game goes that far then why not add rape or torture. Fortunately the developers used common sense and made a great game.

[FantasyStar]

Those games exist, you just haven't played them yet. I'll give you a hint. It got banned in multiple countries, mainly the UK. Sony and Nintendo wouldn't allow it to be published on their consoles. So they took it out.

[RufustheSage]

I killed at least 2 kids when I blew up Megaton. . . . . .

[Larry Fine]

has terrible gameplay. The scope on the guns suck and it takes 5o shots to kill a basic raider. I don't understand. There needs to a duck and cover system. The game let me down.

[Captain Tuttle]

Are you using VATS? I actually find the combat a bit easy, especially in "dungeons"...take a couple of hits getting close and then do a targeted head shot.

[Dark General]

"Yeah about that.... We didn't want a AO rating and to be banned in more countries".

[EvilCackle]

There's things you can do when you're making a grainy, isometric game for a niche market that you can't do with a 3D global release.

Seriously, doesn't anyone really miss it? How many games can you actually kill kids in besides BioShock?

[Bunnyslippers]

is also an rpg shooter. In this old game you could kill a small boy. This game was 15+ according to ELSPA.

[Dark General]

Ah yes the little kid that asked you if you had anything to eat. I remember killing him my first time because i didn't think he would die. Second time i went through the game i gave him some chocolate.

[Bunnyslippers]

Did you kill him after he ate the chocolate or before? lol

[Sarah Palin]

No kiddie-killin. I dont know if thats a good thing or a bad thing.
I mean, any game that gives a free-roaming, anything-goes type of world is awesome, ---BUT should there be limits. I say no. But I can see where limits are something we can all benefit from.

[darthv72]

on xbox live and there is one where you go and set the bomb to explode in megaton city. You then travel to tenpenny tower and push the button to blow it up. I have not played the full game but are there any kids in that city??? Wouldnt they get killed in the explosion? So in essence you dont see them get killed but they do get killed (if there are kids there).

[Figboy]

a few kids actually, one of which is the Sheriff's son, the other is a girl named Maggie, who is being taken care of by a creepy dude named Billy. well, I think he's creepy...

[Massive-Delusion]

I agree and disagree with the decision to not be able to kill children. I do acknowledge that a child cannot defend themselves from attack as well as a adult can (Some might disagree, but MOST children can't...). On the other hand, they are still Human- in what way is killing a child any different to killing an adult? It's a moral dilemma (In my opinion).

[SketchCA]

.

[DNAgent]

Because this game isn't Fallout 3. Sure it could be titled Failout 3 and be pretty accurate but really it's just Nuked Oblivion: Featuring Guns. The REAL Fallout 3 was canceled years ago and this game(?) came out to alienate fans of the previous games and to cater to the more casual FPS fans. This isn't a RPG with FPS elements, it's a FPS with RPG elements and the game itself fails and isn't worth any amount of money.

[Kleptic]

haven't played it yet...but loved the original back on PC 10 years ago...

and I can see where you are coming from, at least from what I have read...critically its doing alright...but yeah i can't get over the fact that this seems so much like Fallout: The Elder Scrolls V or something...it looks so much like Oblivion gameplay wise...interacting with NPCs wise, etc...it just doesn't look or feel like the franchise set up...if that makes any sense...

with everything else coming out though...I simply don't have enough time to put into a game like this...so even if it was a fantastic RPG in the way of the originals...I still probably wouldn't put much time into it because of what else is now available...and don't get me wrong...Oblivion was also awesome...but I played Oblivion when there was next to nothing else available...was a great game for that drought of winter that was 2007...but when 3 or 4 major awesome titles are being released monthly...its not for me...

[Zidandy]

The question is, what kind of sicko would want to kill kids in the first place? Absolutely no need for children to be in the game

[bunbun777]

Sorry but grandmas and other non aggressive types across the world all agree that YOU and ME are sick in the head for playing games where you can eat people, blow their head off with a gun, lie cheat and steal...
And in another generation this will seem silly to new gamers.

So the question is not what "kind" of sicko kills kids, i would rather poke a stick into a pile of dogshi- than figure that out. What is the question is whether the line you draw in the sand for open world-consequence free gaming should be mandatory and shared/forced on everyone else.

Censorship friends, it starts with how you use it on yourself, and based on that how you allow others to influence you with it. Think Freely.

[greg_for_sony]

U are sick in the head if you get off killing kids even if its just a game

[shawnsl65]

There're lots of sickos out there. This thread/post just proved so. Many of these so called "gamers" i refer to them as sickos, can't kill kids in real life, so they tend to subconsciously enjoy doing so in a game. There are many other younger gamers who buy rated M games who are not of age. They use games and try to apply it to reality, this is how killing spree and school shootings come into effect.

If you get your jollies off killing kids, you deserve to die.

[moe84]

...1. The loss of life is arguably tragic, no matter the age, gender, or ethnicity. Saying it's not okay to kill fictional pixels, in a fictional game is stupid. Clearly that pixel will live on, have a family....

....2."There're lots of sickos out there. This thread/post just proved so. Many of these so called "gamers" i refer to them as sickos,"
Taking out a whole city by running/gunning is okay, but the loss of ONE child isn't?

" can't kill kids in real life, so they tend to subconsciously enjoy doing so in a game."
Better to kill a pixelated fictional character, than a real life person.

" There are many other younger gamers who buy rated M games who are not of age. They use games and try to apply it to reality,"
So what, it's the game devs fault someones kid bought a game that they shouldn't have been able to in the first place? Only person to blame for bad parenting... is the parents. 9/10 parents buy such games for their children. They may not know what "Mature" means. Just because you are ignorant, doesn't mean you're free from fault.

" this is how killing spree and school shootings come into effect."
My ass, if you're going to take a gun to school and actually use it, you're going to do it with or without video games. It's been done for years. Even before video games.

"If you get your jollies off killing kids, you deserve to die."
So a child's life is worth more to you than anyone else? More than a nation of people? As gamers, we enjoy our games full of senseless destruction, and genocide. We enjoy killing people over, and over, and over in games. Clearly this is okay, but the thought of a child losing it's life in a FICTIONAL game, is not.

If you want to be concerned with what our children learn from games, that's fine. But you should focus more on cartoons. When a cartoon on FOX, has a 16 year old daughter calling her father a "fat son of a b!tch". Or a cartoon of a 10'ish year old using the utmost disrespect for his father. Hell your kids watch South Park? Enough said. Unless you are looking over your child's shoulder every day, all day. Chances are they are exposed to like cartoons and TV shows. But it's obviously the networks fault, or the fault of the cartoon when YOUR child, learns some colorful new words watching a show they shouldn't have been watching to begin with.

[shawnsl65]

my child is 4 years old and only watches kubo. nuff said. sicko

[perils]

What you cant kill the kids in this game?!!! you can slap them in the face a bit right? RIGHT? Please tell me you can at least swear at them?!!!!......hoho i joke of course. Yeah yeah killing kids in games is just sick!! Kicking the sh!t out of prostitutes, now THATS wholesome fun......

[omodis420]

You have to draw the line somewhere.

[Whitefox789]

As I predicted Bethesda modified a lot of the original fallout series content because in both the first one and second you can kill kids
I have posted a video of me using fraps to show this,

I can see why they took it out because as graphics in games become more realistic their will be idiots who will take games too seriously and have the idea of doing something stupid example; holding up a store, or killing a child in this case.

[AngryTypingGuy]

You can't kill kids in the game because they were afraid of offending somebody, and we live in a day and age where companies are afraid of offending anyone in the least. We also live in a time where no one takes context into account.

I don't really care about killing kids in a videogame, in fact I'd prefer not to, but then again they are just virtual characters in a fictional world in a fictional game. I'm just trying to point out that political correctness ruins everything and will eventually be the downfall of society.

[Aft3rKill]

bad translation lol

[omodis420]

That is sick. I think (and this is to all the people making pro kid killing comments) that if any of you actually had a kid you might feel different. It is just disgusting that some of you think they should have allowed it. I mean you can molest children in real life. Should that be in a game? Sick sick bastards. To all of you in favor of killing kids...Do the rest of a favor and keep it to yourself.

[shawnsl65]

yeah i hope most of these sickos on N4g stay in their basement and never sees daylight. I wouldn't want them to be anywhere near elementary schools and parks where there're children roaming around.

[SketchCA]

I think that adding kids into a game and being allowed to kill them is really a stupid decision.

As graphics get better, the results of a decision like this are going to become more and more disturbing.

As far as the people who think it's hypocritical to say this, how bout in the new GTAV, we have children prositutes and scenes where Niko gets blowjobs from two 5 year old girls softly crying instead of moaning like the hookers in the back of seedy, underground club with cameras recording all of it to watch later? We already have female strippers in the game, so its only logical to have kids doing it right?

/extrrrreeemeee sarcasm

[Matpan]

Well, I guess it´s up to the developer and it was purely a marketing issuer rather than a moral one. I really see no moral barrier to be broken in a game... it´s a game... It really doesn´t matter at all what you do in a game, it has no influence whatsoever of who you are in real life.

Gee I would get a grenade make a puppy swallow it, stuff the puppy into a kids mouth, toss the kid to a crippled old man in a wheelchair driven by an old lady and head shot the kid right before he hits the ground and blows along with the crippled aold man and the old lady, if I was able to...
And just after that, I can play a new campaign as a paladin of justice, saving the day. It´s the fun things about "open world" games, they let you explore all those angles :P

If a game gives me the choice to be the meanest bastard on earth, why can´t I choose it?

I see nothing wrong in that... I am not discussing this particular case. I am pretty sure many of the people who would raise red flags if this game had allowed such thing would walk by a starving homeless without even bothering to give him some spare money or buying him something to eat...

I hate the twisted way moralists and censors act... For christ´s sake... look arround you to realize there is MUCH more to do in favour of human rights and moral, than to b1tch about a game and the fact you can kill a kid or not in it...

I really couldn´t care less. No killing kids... I guess i´ll turn to defenseless wounded animals :P jk.

[Neo Nugget]

Why not make it like mercs?:P
Just hurt them ^_^
...
.......
...........
...............I don't see a problem with this right now.
Is someone seriously [email protected]#%&# WHY CAN'T I KILL THIS KID AHHHH!

[GamerGirl4life]

I don't think you should be allowed to kill kids in a game. Of course, I may just be saying this because I have a 4 yr. old son and another on the way. Honestly if you were allowed to do so, I agree w/ the others in that there should be sever consequences if you choose to do so. I don't think it's ethical to kill someone unless they are trying to kill you or someone you love and/or care about. I know you will not encounter any children trying to shoot you up w/ a Rock-it launcher in F3. Don't get me wrong this game is great, but do you really have to kill be able to kill EVERYTHING to be satisfied w/ it? Ammo is a precious commodity and sometimes hard to come by so why waste it? Imagine the people who might be playing this game right now who don't understand the consequences of killing at all. Even w/ the M rating, I'm sure there are plenty of children and/or people that have witnessed this game and may actually think of copying what they see on it in real life someday. What I'm trying to say is I think certain people should not be allowed to play this game. I believe I was raised w/ good morals and values and I wasn't upset that I couldn't play an M rated game until I turned 17. My son has seen some violent games before and he is quite frightened by them. I'm sorry but you can't have a game w/ an M rating that allows you kill children. As far as I'm concerned, that would be right up there w/ being allowed to see your characters completely nude and having sex at the same time. Come on people, get real!!! This is rated M not AO!

[GamerGirl4life]

Yes, if a child tried to kill me in a game, I would defend myself and fight back. If you want a game where you can kill kids and have sex then just look for an AO rated game. There may be M rated games where you can kill children and watch fully nude sex scenes but thank goodness I have never seen them. My children will always be more important than video games and I'm sure anyone else w/ children would agree w/ me. We all are or were children so if you think it's "cool" to kill them, then sadly I think you probably have mindset of a child. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but can't we just play F3 and be content w/ it?

[fenix1300]

what if some whack job uses fallout as an excuse to kill a child. despite it obviously not being the developers fault they will still feel guilt. I think that was the main reason that they did not want to do this.

If any one has already pointed this out kudos I was too lazy to read all the comments.