Any chance we will be able to Cut up peoples Bodies again for Body Parts?

[Tina Small]

I'm done with this conversation. You're completely missing the point I'm trying to make. Yes, I personally wouldn't be thrilled if they put this back in because I know a young woman whocame to my house many, many times over the years as she was growing up and is now going to prison for decapitating and cutting up a corpse. But I understand that some people think it's a really, really cool thing to put in a game and it's something I don't have to do personally.

That's not the reason I have been making these posts. The reason is that I think the whole process of putting what you folks want back into the game would cost a significant amount of money, especially with regard to countries other than the U.S. Yes, I understand the artwork is already in the game. I don't think that would make any difference to the rating agencies. I think it's what you are able to do with that artwork that would be key.

I also think EA would be very, very foolish to attempt to fool a foreign rating organization and just not mention that they added some gory mechanism to the game. There could be financial penalties and sanctions that result from trying to dupe a foreign rating organization especially when that rating agency has the force of law behind it. I really don't think that EA cares enough about UO to spend the money that a re-rating process would require. And whether or not the game is sold as a box in a store or only online, I believe in most countries you still would want to have your game rated to improve the chances of people buying it and not later being surprised by its contents and complaining that you misled them.

I'm done. I don't know how to make my points any clearer than this.

 

[Mirt]

I'm done with this conversation. You're completely missing the point I'm trying to make. Yes, I personally wouldn't be thrilled if they put this back in because I know a young woman whocame to my house many, many times over the years as she was growing up and is now going to prison for decapitating and cutting up a corpse. But I understand that some people think it's a really, really cool thing to put in a game and it's something I don't have to do personally.

That's not the reason I have been making these posts. The reason is that I think the whole process of putting what you folks want back into the game would cost a significant amount of money, especially with regard to countries other than the U.S. Yes, I understand the artwork is already in the game. I don't think that would make any difference to the rating agencies. I think it's what you are able to do with that artwork that would be key.

I also think EA would be very, very foolish to attempt to fool a foreign rating organization and just not mention that they added some gory mechanism to the game. There could be financial penalties and sanctions that result from trying to dupe a foreign rating organization especially when that rating agency has the force of law behind it. I really don't think that EA cares enough about UO to spend the money that a re-rating process would require. And whether or not the game is sold as a box in a store or only online, I believe in most countries you still would want to have your game rated to improve the chances of people buying it and not later being surprised by its contents and complaining that you misled them.

I'm done. I don't know how to make my points any clearer than this.

Your points are clear I just keep telling you thats not how the law of it works. Its about the depiction. Its pretty clearly stated and is how text based games get away with things. IN this case there is no depiction that has not already been ruled on. I understand the personal pain that what happened to that young lady is causing you but the idea that actions in a game help create or motivate killers is mistaken. It would be great if simply getting rid of violent games and tv made people nonviolent but it doesn't and attempting to remove violenece doesn't work. We already pointed out how violent UO is. How the art is there and how the parts can even be fed to your pets. Trust me this isn't sneaking anything past anyone. Its simply that it was done in another time for one reason. The reason is no longer valid and it was a wonderful system that gave some consquence to being a red. Bringing it back would be good for UO and for pvp. While I am sure some players will be jerks about it and keep heads as trophies that is something that they should let us do. Diablo one had ears for that. Listen I think right now there is a lot of hurt about what happened in real life. About that I am sorry for you. That being said without new depictions this would not justify a ratings change. Just like adding in a new patch wouldn't. Honestly the ratings nannies have lost most of their teeth worldwide due to digital downloads of games. Also just so you know hosted in the UK there is a game called socilotron. If you want to get your dander up learn anything about that game. I found out about it today trying to figure out just how strict the UK content rules were. Its a game that actially has sexual assault as a game mechanic. If that can be hosted this would be nothing. (an aside please I am hoping nobody actually plays that crazy game).

 

[Cirno]

Would it even need a ratings change, though?
A decade ago, people were much more sensitive about violence in games, and so dismembering of a person's corpse could more than conceivably be a deal-breaker.
Nowadays, double-clicking on a pixelknife and targeting a pixelcorpse to spawn pixelbody-parts just isn't going to be as powerful it once was.

Also, off the tangent of ratings changes; rather than just asking "why shouldn't they?" you should also ask "why should they?"
What's the benefit to cutting up of corpses that makes it worth their time/money/risk to implement it?

 

[Raptor85]

You're completely ignoring the rest of that article. The game would have to go through another rating process in several countries and that costs money.

IIRC the only countries where the ratings are mandatory to conduct business in that country is Germany and Australia, since there's no store copy it can be changed to unrated elsewhere.

Mirt's post aboe is correct though, the T rating was put in place for the 2002 boxed version that was exclusive to Walmart, at the time they had a store policy of not stocking M rated games or any music rated for language (any CD's bought there would be censored versions). EA ripped out the entire bounty system to meet the requirements, among other things....the game's just never been as fun since without the ability to post bounties on someone who attacked you or turn in their head to the guard captain to collect the posted bounty. There were entire GUILDS, and large ones, entirely centered around that functionality of the game, it was probably the most fun feature UO ever had, taking it out got rid of a lot of players.

 

[Lord Nabin]

That would probably get us a Mature rating too. Although the ratings system is different in different parts of the world. Assassins Creed two was essentially rated Mature while three is still pending ratings I would say its safe to say it will be the same.

This too might help to remind folks what the ratings mean
ESRB ratings guide and definitions
Broken down its as such
TEENTitles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.
MATURETitles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

Personally I think for MMO's where you cannot control the actions of all the players by default they should be rated M. Adding in the head cutting off could probably still be done with a teen rating but it would be up to the ESRB to determine that. That being said as there is no retail presence for UO anymore the old rules to keep Wallmart carrying the game hardly matter. The biggest titles of the year have all been rated Mature and that has not hurt their sales one bit. I suspect it would actually do the opposite and set UO apart as a more mature MMO as opposed to model more for the kids. The game play itself would also support this model and just an fyi the outfits and ability to run around almost nude would as well. Subicci as well count as sexual content if you ask me.

I never ever said I was opposed to a Mature Rating. All I have ever said was this

PVP was not in my personal Value Set
I recognize it as a valid way to play the Game
and I provided an alternative which I would support as opposed to Chopping up Bodies. Assassin Contract.

I really don't see that a rating change would cost EA a ton of $$$ but I do see Tina's point.

The Fact that the Game is rated as Teen opens the door to a much wider audience and as we roll into the Second generation of Players, That is a a serious revenue stream for EA.

Trust me when I say there are tons of Kids who have watched their parents play UO as they were growing up and those kids are chomping at the bit to get in game and play.

That creates extra accounts and revenue for UO. There may not be a ton of Advertising $$$ being spent on promoting UO but you can not beat the word of mouth.

I engage several returning Vets a month who are looking to return to the Game. Ultima Online is Far from Dead and the Draw is Everlasting so far.

Yes there are many who have left however they always seem to make their way back home one way or another.

I welcome them with open arms.

You all need to figure out the rest.

 

[kelmo]

In my humble opinion this entire conversation is silly. Those things are are never gonna happen. No heads. No jerky. No cannibalism stuff.