Forum:Come on, NOVA! What are you here for?!

I'm sorry but, is there something I'm missing? I pay Nova 120 caps, I follow her up to the room, I shut the door, and...crap! All she does is lay there! Her article on this site I think said when she's laying on the bed, you can talk to her and now can make some suggestive statements, but I don't see them!

I checked Youtube (for an admittidly short amount of time) to see if anyone figured it out, but I guess not. So you're really just supposed to sleep in the bed with the black screen and PRETEND!?! 72.135.101.78 10:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Graphic gore and violence are OK for video games, but as soon as simulated sex is shown everyone wants to sue the game company for destroying our children's moral fiber. --MadDawg2552 16:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Sad, but true. When the movie 'Hitman' came out, I went with some friends. We're partway through the film when the girl tries to seduce 47 and peels off her top. We see two adults along with two children who couldn't have been more than 12 years old get up and walk out of the theater. Now, this was an R-rated film based on an M-rated game. Arterial spray and blood galore is okay, but bare breasts? Oh, noes!Shadowgm 17:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Shadowgm
 * On the other hand, is anyone really confident that pre-scripted virtual sex with a bored prostitute in a shack that Moriarty probably has wired for sound and video is worth the caps? Or that the current state of the art is up to portraying consensual acts?Shadowgm 17:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Shadowgm
 * Computer hardware and software are up to the task of portraying virtual sex rather realistically. I don't think it would work very well in the Fallout 3 engine, on the other hand.  I wouldn't mind sex in video games if it was part of the story (super-spy meets super-babe), but having it just to have it would detract from the experience, and it's really not needed in this game.  --MadDawg2552 21:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, fair enough. It's not that I reeeeally wanted it, I'm just mad that they would take the time to create a prostitute in the game and not really DO anything with it! If Bathesda doesn't want sex in the game, why tease us by making us think that there is? 72.135.101.78 01:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No offense meant here, but what's the point in showing the act anyway? Despite how worked up people get over it. Why would anyone actually be interested in watching a virtual sex scene (unless it's "movie style" like Mass Effect was)? PlasmaFox 02:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To reply to Shadowgm's comment about adults letting their children watch mature violence but not a pair of naked breasts, I have a 6 years old daughter and I'm concerned about the amount of graphical violence she is exposed to through TV, movies and video games. She seems to be already desensitized to seeing a murder, even a somewhat gory one. It is scary and appalling. I'm not in favour of having children partaking of the sexual desires that are raised in an audience that is watching an R-Rated sex scene, though. Quintal 78.114.155.215 18:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not like I'm big on videogame sex or anything, but I agree with the sentiment- it seems really stupid to have Nova basically say "Hey, I'm a prostitute- pay me this and I'll have sex with you" and then go upstairs and go to sleep. To borrow a rather crude figure of speech... come on Bethesda, either crap or get off the pot. If you want prostitutes and sex in the game, then commit to them. If you don't, then don't put them in. Period, end of discussion. It's a mature game for mature audiences, it has exploding heads and flying eyeballs and RAMPANT swearing and some of the vilest language imaginable. You can assume we're all adults here, so treat us like adults. If you're squeamish about VG sex, then that's fine by me, but don't pretend to be all hip and down with it. If you don't want your prostitute to have sex with the lone wanderer, then fine... don't have her OFFER to have sex with the lone wanderer if he/she pays up.

I like the way it was done in GTA and Fable 2- the lights go out, various clues are given, and the rest is left to your imagination. It's adult and slightly edgy without being crude or grotesque. Those are two video games that understand that their market audience are adults and treats them as such. Some Sort 03:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, they could have gone the Fable 2 or GTA 4 route. But with GTA the prostitute scenes are fairly graphic, at least in contrast to the previous iterations of the same. But when Niko takes a 'date' home it's very much like Fable 2's dark screen and suggestive sounds. I get that Bethesda didn't want a "Hot Coffee" type incident, but they could have made a compromise or just charged you for the bed. The act itself doesn't really need to be seen but could have been implied. She could have been used like Brianna in Meresti, who offers services to the men of The Family but just flirts with the player.--JiNX Bloodfang 11:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem with video games is that they are age-rated but they are played or at least seen being played by everyone, and the game companies want to have the mature rating in order to gain prestige among the mature audience while keeping as broad a buyers' age-range as possible (At least, say 10+ years old for Fallout 3). Hence the half-a$$ed prostitute scene(s) in Fallout 3. On the other hand when the "The Witcher" developers included sex scenes and collectible-sex-encounter-cards in their game they got flack from the feminist crowd. As it stands, Fallout 3 isn't a mature game. I don't care what its rating is but having played it I deem its typical customer base to be teenagers... young teenagers (11-15 not 16-19). That can explain the sucky prostitute encounter. BTW there were no sex scenes in Fallout 1 (only sexual dialogues) but the game felt more mature because the writers were so much better and they had filled their text with countless references and humoristic traits. Fallout 1 had awesome writers and that's why a mature audience loved it. Bethesda has focused on combat visuals, that's what virgin boys crave. They haven't put much effort into the story or the writing. Their game won't create a fans crowd as Fallout 1 did. But it made a boatload of money and that's all it was about. Milking the prestigious Fallout franchise. Making money off of someone else's outstanding creative work. Fallout is a work of art. Fallout 3 is just a piece of software merchandise. Quintal 78.114.155.215 18:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Fallout 3 is most DEFINITELY a mature game. I would *NEVER* let a 15-year old boy play this, to say NOTHING AT ALL of an 11-year old. Aside from the ludicrously excessive gore (especially in the Raider encampments) and moderately suggestive content there is the RAMPANT adult language, from the "Fuck you"s spraypainted on the wall to the constant swearing among the NPCs (most notably among the children of Little Lamplight). Fallout 3 comes by its "M" rating honestly- this is absolutely a game for mature audiences. Some Sort 02:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

first i have to say f3 IS a work of god through mortal men and that i find the origionals to be lacking in ingenuity and all other things that make a game fun, thats not to say the story of the fallout games isnt the best of all games but its just that they didnt chose the write thing when they thought of turned based. and no nova wont do anything while in bed with you she just lays there=(this is my site! 19:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm fifteen, and the main reason fallout 3 is rated M is because of graphic swearing and gore. This does not impress on me much because of the way my generation was raised. But what I do not understand Some Sort is why adults who are willing to play M games do not let their children do so and not feel like hypocrites. I am not a 5 year old or a 7 year old. If I were, I would not be mature enough to play gory games. But I am a teen and I will not be traumatized or deeply effected by games like fallout 3. End of point. kill the overseer! 08:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * First off, I know exactly how your generation was raised, because I'm part of your generation; I'm only 24. As for how I can play an M-rated game and not let a 15-year old do the same without feeling like a hypocrite... well, you agree with me that the material in Fallout 3 is not appropriate for all ages, because you explicitly stated that 5 year olds and 7 year olds are not mature enough to play gory games. So tell me how you are willing to play M games and not let a 5-year old without feeling like a hypocrite. That's pretty much the same way I could net let a 15-year old play without feeling like a hypocrite. We clearly agree that much of the material in Fallout 3 is inappropriate for audiences that are too young, we simply disagree on what, exactly, is "too young". Obviously you feel that 15 is NOT too young. Just as obviously, you're rather biased on the subject. If you were 14, I bet you'd say that 14 was not too young. If you were 12, you'd probably argue that 12 was not too young. Personally, I've seen medical studies that suggested that the brain was still developing until 18, and that exposure to images of violence as a means of conflict resolution during this period will predispose someone to considering violence as a viable means of conflict resolution in their own life. Of course, I was 18 when I read that study, so I quickly discarded it- as with you, I was always one to believe that however old I was was "old enough". Personally, I'd draw the line at 17 years old. That's how old you have to be to see an R-rated movie on your own, and if Fallout 3 were a movie, it would certainly be rated R.


 * I am 32. My kids are 10, 5, and 2. I wouldn't feel like a hypocrite for not allowing my children to play M rated games. Of all the gamers in the world, the average age is 33, so there will always be games developed that are made for the adult gamers. Children have no business playing those games. I am sick of getting on COD4 and being forced to hear some sqeaky pre-teen voices because their parents would rather stick a controller in their hands instead of being good parents. My children will not watch R rated movies until they are 17, and they won't play M rated games until they are 17. There are plenty of kid games out there that are fun enough for me to play with my kids....when I want to play M rated games, I will, but they aren't going to do it. Some parents don't care, and will let their children play anything as long as it keeps their kids out of their way. I am a better parent than that. Gsmikem 18:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a difference between age and maturity. Just because your kids are 17 doesn't mean they are mature enough to handle violence.  The opposite is true, too.  Just because a kid is 13 doesn't mean he won't be able to handle it.  A good parent (as you claim to be) would know the difference.  --MadDawg2552 19:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally, it has nothing to do with maturity level and everything to do with development. Or, in other words, if you have a very mature 15-year old, a good way to ensure that he REMAINS very mature is to not expose him to certain types of material while he's still developing his personality. Some Sort 22:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Want to know what I find interesting? The Sims 2 shows graphic sex but is only rated T for Teen. Granted it's only the PG-13 graphic sex, but so was Hot Coffee. --MadDawg2552 17:50, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

--

You don't know what graphic sex is. The sims blurs it out and has them go under the covers. Hot coffee was not graphic sex because it didn't have any genitals. And actually, I was told that the brain is still developing until 25. But that doesn't stop a 16-year-old like me from playing Fallout 3. My parents bought me GTA2 when I was 8. 75.34.92.29 01:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

wasn't GTA2 at about the same violence level as tank trouble? Flying Dagger 17:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I am 13 years old. I love Fallout 3, and although I think that seeing this violence and sex in popular media has desensitized me to it [after all, it's not real] it does nothing to change my perception of real life. My personality has not changed. I mean, at school, the kids talk about sex and violence frequently, and nobody bats an eye. That's because they know they're not serious, and it's not real. Anyway, I think it's fine for children 10+ to play M rated games [as long as they know about the birds and the bees] because if their school is anything like mine, they will already be exposed to it every day by their friends. And no, I am not from the inner city. I live on the Upper East Side, in Manhattan, one of the richest neighborhoods in the country [not that i'm rich], so I figure if it happens here, it happens everywhere. I mean, I knew how sex worked from my friends long before I was 8, when my mom explained it, because my friends had already told me. My point is, if you or your kid is 10+, they'll probably be exposed to this anyway. I mean, that's my opinion. If you want, you don't have to listen to me. But if your child is 13+, they are almost definitely exposed to this anyway, and are ready for M-rated games. Broeman 03:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be funny if after "employing" Nova, you had to constantly use the toilets in the game and suffered a major itch. LVTDUDE 04:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Broeman, while what you are saying might sound logical to a kid, it isn't logical for a parent. Just because my children hear a conversation among inexperienced pre-teens at school about sex or violence...it doesn't mean I should allow them to watch movies or play games that are designed specifically for adults. My dad talked to me about sex at 5 because I wanted to know why a lady at our church was growing a baby inside her tummy. Just because my dad explained the function of sex, doesn't mean I was ready for a subscription to Penthouse. That's all I'm saying...children need to be protected by parents who love them. It is too easy to aviod spending time with your kids by giving them a controller and having them leave the room...it takes a true parent to know what games your children are playing and how long they have been on it. Gsmikem 15:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. And "I'm exposed to it anyway" doesn't carry a lot of weight with me, personally. If you had a friend at school who smoked, does that mean your parents should start buying you cigarettes? If you had a friend at school who snuck into the fridge and stole one of his father's beers, does that mean your parents should start buying you alcohol? And if not, then why would the fact that your friends talk about gore at school be reason for your parents to let you play gory video games? Besides, there's a radical difference between "knowing" about the birds and the bees and "understanding" about the birds and the bees. Just because you know doesn't mean you understand and are ready to be exposed to that sort of thing in a graphical and gritty manner. Heck, there are plenty of things that *I* don't understand about the birds and the bees... and I'm 24 and happily married! Some Sort 21:25, 4 March 2009 (U

I don't really want to be in the argument, but i'm pre-ty sure that the game has PLENTY explicit content as it is. I mean, VATS? gory detail like no other,bloody mess perk, A good amount of swearing, and even that it has suggestive sexual themes is plenty. But i mean, look at Fable 2.

I personally find it appalling and an insult to my intelligence that an "M"-rated game will show graphic dismemberment and heads exploding, along with use of the words "motherfucker" and "cocksucker" and then get squeamish about showing sexual intercourse. Heaven forbid Bethesda put anything GRATUITOUS in the game, amirite? Western (and I mean that in the uppercase) morality seems to put violence on a pedestal to be worshiped, but God help you if you include a nipple or a pudenda in a game for adults. Sorry, but that's just TOO GRAPHIC. Yet I can see a man's head explode and coat the walls with brains. Ugh. Nightweaver20xx 05:44, September 2, 2009 (UTC)

I would say its up to parents about what games their kids are exposed to in terms of sex/violence, and ratings should help them. This isn't a total safeguard but its better than nothing. You can't allow for every parent who's an idiot unfortunately. Some kids can handle things at different ages - but there are limits which everyone (except idiots) ought to know.

On the subject though, it may seem a bit lopsided about sex in Fallout 3; the violence is graphic and language about the worst of any game I've played. I think though that the problem the developers had was simply making it convincing. The nature of the game is that you tend to see everything happen in front of you rather than "fading to black" (with a few exceptions like when you're healed). The kind of "virtual sex" image that comes into my mind would be quite a funny one! Not maybe the effect that the programmers or gamers wanted. Sometimes it may be better NOT to see! GTA could get away with more because of the different nature of that game.

With this in mind, as others have suggested, the developers could have sidestepped the whole issue and rented you a bed without a "companion". Unless you're the type (caring or otherwise) who just wants to sleep with (not "sleep with") your prostitute! Cally777 15:47, September 6, 2009 (UTC)