Agreed when I think Conan the first three words that come to mind is nudity, snakes and violence I welcome the new gore feature in fact I was going to ask for some placable blood splatters that I could use for decoration.

:brazil: LIGADO :heart_eyes: :star_struck: :+1:

Strange, weren’t the TV series “Rome” and “Game of Thrones” shown in the USA? But there is a lot of nudity there.

1 Like

It was an ear mark for AoC.

I have no problem with either, but there still needs to be a toggle for the ones that dont want it.
Mine will be on.

Have not watched TV in 24 years. I have better things to do with my time.

Ive been on RP servers in the past that were Roman sex orgies.

Each to their own devices.

Yea I’m not sure what world he lives in. Tons of USA productions have sex+nudity for years now, though it’s mostly series. Even male frontal nudity, which is extra rare.

And AFAIK the USA still produces most of the “adult content” in the world by very far as well :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I’ll admit it right now.

Though it seems I’m stuck with a loincloth now. :unamused:

As someone that lives in the States nudity is automatically lumped into fornication. Feeding a baby is a scandal because someone might have impure thoughts. Religion is uhh… Religion.

@biglouis that’s accurate, but they can’t be excited.

@Teng those were on extra channels here, so it’s not what Memaw and Pepaw are seeing when they’re binge watching the news.

Exactly.

This is a reasonable request that has been implemented in other games for decades.

It’s not a feature i want, but that does not matter.

2 Likes

Yes. It breaks too easily and doesn’t have enough redundancy. I mean, we have two lungs, two kidneys, two testicles/ovaries, but only one heart and one liver.

From an aesthetic perspective, as an occasional artist I enjoy the human body in various shapes and sizes. I also grew up in Finland with mixed bathing and saunas, so I never “learned” to associate nudity with (only) sex.

6 Likes

Much of the human body never adapted sufficiently to the newly acquired ability to walk upright. Veins of the legs and spine suffer from increased load, hence the frequent diseases of these organs. Also, difficult childbirth is a consequence of walking upright.

:rofl:

I see. You’re an adept of the doggy style. For walking obviously! :smile:

I am from the Happy Days of America
(if you dont know it was a TV show)

Conan Exiles needs all of those beautiful fatalities from Age of Conan. That was a good time and I would like to relive it in the exile lands!

So the misunderstanding (I’d argue anti-US propaganda), is that because Nudity isn’t available by default (is available still through a few steps) on the Xbox and Playstation platforms that it is indicative of the entire country. And many examples given are ignorant (or ignores based on a bias) of the regional and cultural differences among our 330 Million multicultural and multiethnic population. This would be akin to suggesting that a country like Germany condones animal cruelty because of the bullfighting practices in Spain.

Ha my wife does, she’s also European so that might be a part of it. Then again, I think she just hates the rags they make you wear.

Again, to my point, all preference. Players arent “forced” to wear dingy rags to enjoy the game lol

2 Likes

Might not be anymore. My work around was setting my system to New Zealand. Now if I enable full nudity I simply have an invisible area from mid waist down to the knees.

For the “it wont affect you at all crowd”, it does.

Anything that establishes patterns of community in a game affects everyone who plays the game. I dont really care. Anything I dislike, I mod out. But it is not true that “toggles” do not affect those who simply toggle the stuff the way they want.

2 Likes

No, it really doesn’t.

I play with my friend all the time in co-op, and in the past on private servers. They always play with full nudity turned on. I do not. My usage of that toggle has literally no effect on their gaming experience in any way what so ever. So I am sorry to break it to you but no, adding that toggle to the game does not affect you. It is quit simply a factual statement.

2 Likes

It is not.

To make a toggle, you need to add systems to handle the toggle, and to adapt other things in the system to handle both situations. When you have multiple people playing a same game, you gotta make a choice.
Same thing people dont understand about “Err to both sides”. When you decide to do something about stats, either one side, or the other, you have to choose what you are making a statement about in terms of game design. You will always be going against one design by choosing another.
A factual “statement” is the existence of “Cost of Opportunity”, which means the cost of doing something and not something else.
There is always a cost of opportunity in doing anything that you are not doing something else instead.
Putting a toggle does not mean you are allowing “both”, instead you are placing a choice.
Another thing people dont understand in general: Having a choice is not freedom, it is most cases, the removal of a freedom, as you are made choose among options that most of the times, are not selected by you.

But I dont blame this “functional misunderstanding” in the people who make it, because it is not something people are made understand in most cases, as it is something used to “advertise” “goodness” on people.

But no, offering a choice is not allowing you freedom, it is instead establishing patterns of behavior. It is establishing conformity all the same.

One nice quote about it is given in the game Mass Effect by Sovereign:
“By using it, your society develops along the paths we desire”.
Alluding to the fact later explained that they construct the citadel around the powerful mass relay that bring them from dark space so the powerful civilizations of that cycle are all concentrated around it and the mass relay network. That speeds up the harvest process and facilitates their logistics.

Establishing options or defining “mandates” always have the same purpose, developing along the paths the developer desire. That is also why you can make a game that looks like a sandbox but it is instead theme park, and why most games are not 100% either. There is always design choices and design techniques to funnel players into doing something, one of them is CHOICES.

Like the controls for example. Funcom states we have a choice, but we do not. Previously we have a specific control that is the basic unreal control scheme, and now we have a toggle and a drop down that do not accomplish the same function, not because we dont have “either option”, but because we cant choose it to be exactly the way it was anymore, instead, we have two choices that cant combine to form the previous control scheme.

Systems are in this position. You might not be able to allow choice and have it the way it is without a choice. Simply because of, again, cost of opportunity. If you have one “more broad scheme”, it might be not possible to resume in one or two choices all the options needed to allow for what X, Y and Z person wants, so they have to select what groups they will privilege with the options they are able to offer. So instead of working to make one more broad useful feature, they give 2, 3 choices that cannot satisfy beyond the 2 or 3 specific subgroups that want each choice.

Then there is the effect of plain field. By electing to break down those into choices, they might electing to privilege those who want those specific points to get optimal results, while not giving the same privilege to other that are not in those subgroups. With one specific choice only, everyone is in the same boat, and there are not subgroups privileged by the alternatives.

In terms of the specific thing about toggles, I already said, it does not matter to me, and if it did, I would mod it. What I am saying is that a “blanket statement” about options do not interfere with those who just dont want to toggle it as a general principle is WRONG. In this specific case it does not matter, but IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE.

However, it does set a pattern of making the game “not unique”. It is like asking a hentai game to have nudity toggle, or a fight game to have a violence toggle. Conan universe is predicated on gore, nudity and violence. I understand the legal problems with the nudity, which is unfortunately a reality in “your part of the World”. But the others, it is just bogus. Irrelevant, but bogus.

1 Like

I’m sorry, but again you are completely and utterly wrong. Having no choice is removing freedom, having A choice is not. You seriously have a warped view of things here.

Again no. Offering more options is once again not “establishing conformity”. Establishing conformity would be the exact opposite of offering more options, it would be removing options and forcing people into per-determinted routes with no options to change anything at all.

I completely agree with this. I also happen to have a very young child who enjoys watching me play, which is why I do not play with full nudity turned on. It is not because I am “offended” by it or any nonsense like that. So if someone is in a position where they would prefer to have a toggle to turn off the graphic gore of, for example, the new fatality system, because they have very young children present who may very well be present and they do not wish for them to see such graphic displays of gore, then why would you be opposed to allowing them the freedom of that option? You seem to be under the illusion that you are saving their freedom by denying it to them, but you aren’t.

And there you have it in a nut shell. If it really does not matter to you the kindly move along and stop prattling on as if you know what you are talking about while saying the exact opposite of what you seem to think you are saying. I for one am done with this conversation though.

3 Likes