Those were easter eggs. The Fatman is an official weapon of the game. Not only that, the alien blaster and Monty Python scenes didn't contradict a major element of the game. You're using a direct-fire nuclear bomb mass driver in a game that boasts radiation management as a key feature.
Agree 100% (ranting is fun) The one question that could give a clear indication on what their intentions are is,..what will the game be rated, or what is your target rating? If it's "M" I'm just going to assume that means it's offensive content will be on par with morrowind or Oblivion (non-existant). If the game is rated "AO" only then will I have some hope. But I think most sceptics already know in their gut that it's not going to be rated AO. So the outlook isn't good at all. All signs (present and past) indicate it's probably going to just be another kiddie fluff game. I will admit to being wrong if they prove me wrong which is highly doubtfull.For the people who don't see nothing wrong in Bethesda taking the mantle of Fallout, a good analogy would be imagining the makers of Call of Duty buying the rights to develop Red Orchestra 2. In both situations the company has made games in the similar genre while the style has been dramatically different. It's like waiting Uwe Boll to suddenly direct Oscar winning drama.
Bethesda wants to ensure that the content is suitable for teen audience so the drugs won't probably have side effects (they only empower), no alcoholism or narcotic related subjects (like addicted characters), no prostitution or sex (and I don't meant this as sex simulation but in a subject on post apocalyptic world), no strong language and well, I don't have high hopes for interesting characters, sub-plots or mature tones in the story either. Warrior of the wastes saves the world. After playing Oblivion, I just can't see them making anything except a dumbed down cross-platform teen action adventure game.
And I agree with Xendance that speculation isn't worth jack or poo. Ranting is just fun.
American culture is extremely bizzare. I've never understood it and probably never will. For movies released in theatres or video games the rules are basically: Ultra sick violence=A OK. Nudity or sex= OMG CALL THE FBI!!! THIS PRODUCT IS UNSUITABLE FOR HUMANS!!!
It doesn't make sense if you over simplify it. Like saying that its ok to chop off a breast but you are not allowed to kiss it.
) and being kids they don't know much about what happens afterwards and those after effects are rarely thematized in movies. Pregnancy, infections, HIV tests etc.Yes but that's not my point I'm trying to make. Of course kids should not be able to view graphic sexuality or nudity. My point is to actually enforce ratings for video games, movies, whatever, so people that are adult enough for "adult stuff" can watch such movies or play such video games without the anti-sex/ anti-violence/anti-disturbing imagery & subject matter Lynch mob going beserk.Show them a violent movie (e.g. a war movie. SPR, EatG, ABtf) and they instantly know that violence is bad.
But if kids see people having sex they might try it too (looks like fun, doesn't it?
LOL! The apocalypse isn't for the weak eh? Also I wouldn't expect some graphic depiction of sex acts but they could just have you "wake up" and your screen slowly unfades then you get some dialog like "Yeah thankz 4 nothin @#$#^" or "I Gavez U da GonareeAA tee hee" those are just 2 possible classy scenarios right there, lol.
