UnrealEdv3 Disabled?

[hexbomb]

Please disable UnrealEdv3 because I don't want to see kids putting out skin mods for this game, if you get my drift.

[redrain85]

Good grief, you've got to be kidding. No mods for the game at all, just because somebody might make a nude skin?

Even if someone did, that would be third-party user created content. And not unlocking something that was already in the game, like with the "Hot Coffee" scandal. That's the reason there was such a big fuss, it was because the content already existed in the game and was hidden from the ESRB. Rockstar broke the rules. If a fan makes something "bad" it won't affect the ESRB rating, nor cause such an uproar.

[MF9000]

Please disable UnrealEdv3 because I don't want to see kids putting out skin mods for this game, if you get my drift.

I think what you're suggesting is censorship. Yes? I guess the parents out there better pay attention to what their children are doing and playing better. I understand your concern, but I don't think it would be a good thing to block others who would use editor in a more appropriate way.

[lotkrotan]

Good grief, you've got to be kidding. No mods for the game at all, just because somebody might make a nude skin?

Even if someone did, that would be third-party user created content. And not unlocking something that was already in the game, like with the "Hot Coffee" scandal. That's the reason there was such a big fuss, it was because the content already existed in the game and was hidden from the ESRB. Rockstar broke the rules. If a fan makes something "bad" it won't affect the ESRB rating, nor cause such an uproar.

what about Oblivion? There was a nude patch made for it, and that caused the ESRB to re evaluate the rating...

[MF9000]

what about Oblivion? There was a nude patch made for it, and that caused the ESRB to re evaluate the rating...

It's not the game developer's problem if a 3rd party decides to make something that isn't endorsed by the developer. IMO I don't think the ESRB should have a right to re-evaluate a rating based on a 3rd party's use of an editor to make skins that other folks don't like.

[hexbomb]

Guys, you don't understand, so I'll explain. I'm referencing to that nude patch that everyone knew about for Sims 2. I don't want, for example, someone unethically retexturing the model of Little Sister and then releasing a mutator for that on the internet... Plain and simple.

[redrain85]

what about Oblivion? There was a nude patch made for it, and that caused the ESRB to re evaluate the rating...
Again, that nude skin was in the game already. It was hidden from the ESRB. So that's why there was a stink about it.

Guys, you don't understand, so I'll explain. I'm referencing to that nude patch that everyone knew about for Sims 2. I don't want, for example, someone unethically retexturing the model of Little Sister and then releasing a mutator for that on the internet... Plain and simple.
That's ludicrous. I agree with MF9000, what you're suggesting is censorship.

[MF9000]

Guys, you don't understand, so I'll explain. I'm referencing to that nude patch that everyone knew about for Sims 2. I don't want, for example, someone unethically retexturing the model of Little Sister and then releasing a mutator for that on the internet... Plain and simple.

I agree with not wanting some perv remaking the LS skin, but I don't think it's a good idea to disable the editor. Most people aren't going to use the editor to make inappropriate skins and I don't think disabling the editor is the answer. Besides there are already games out that use U3 and include the editor, so the horse is already out of the stall. The best thing you can do is report the perv offering the skin to the hosting website if found. I would think most would remove the offending file and usually it's a violation of use terms to offer up that kind of file (porn related, etc.). Depends of course on the hosting company.

[redrain85]

It's not the game developer's problem if a 3rd party decides to make something that isn't endorsed by the developer. IMO I don't think the ESRB should have a right to re-evaluate a rating based on a 3rd party's use of an editor to make skins that other folks don't like.
They don't . . . yet. It's why they have an advisory now that states "game content may vary due to online play" or somesuch.

The ESRB has only freaked out when something was hidden in the game, and unlocked by a mod. And it's not the mod that bothered them, it's the fact that content was included in the game that was hidden from them and they were not advised about it. It means that, technically, the game did not receive the proper rating, and the ESRB were kept in the dark about content included with the game that would affect the rating.

[BioCrack]

first off u dont make skins with unrealed .

unreald is for mostly level design and gameplay elements

u make skins with photoshop and then edit some of the models and code to get them in


so taking out unreal ed makes no sense


what ur asking for is mostly impossible

[hexbomb]

first off u dont make skins with unrealed .

unreald is for mostly level design and gameplay elements

u make skins with photoshop and then edit some of the models and code to get them in


so taking out unreal ed makes no sense


what ur asking for is mostly impossible

I meant unrealed in general, not the map editor, lol.

[Yabbering Yeti]

I have never heard of anyone modding a kid to be nude in a game... I know the kind of people who would want to are probably out there, but come on... Theres been the opportunity for this thing in the past and no one has taken a swing at it. Even if someone did it wouldnt get circulated and you would probably never know about it.

Not to mention you couldnt simply re-skin the little sister, The clothes are elaborate and part of the model... if you tried to wrap a body skin around that model it would just look ridiculous. Someone would have to re-make the model and then it would be as much work to make a naked LS in this game as in any other with mod tools.

So don't worry about it, It's more likely for us to see a naked big daddy. But its soooo very rare to see a model conversion in a game that its really not going to happen.

[redrain85]

I don't want to see a Little Sister nude skin either. That would be sick and stupid. But to completely deny the possibility of modding Bioshock because of that, is silly.

Like Yabbering Yeti said, if such a thing did get made I doubt it would be popular. In fact, more than likely, the creator of such a mod would receive a verbal beatdown from the community, and have their mod removed from download on any site where it was hosted.

[BioCrack]

I meant unrealed in general, not the map editor, lol.

unrealed in general is a map ediotr theres no other use to it

thats all there is

i really think u dont know what ur talking about

[russianspy]

Nude skins are weird. Just watch some porn.

[hexbomb]

unrealed in general is a map ediotr theres no other use to it

thats all there is

i really think u dont know what ur talking about

Dude, I meant Unreal Technology 3.0, so sh*t up.

[Yabbering Yeti]

Ah i see, so your not meaning the editor but the nature of the engine itself??
Unfortunatly for you its the nature of the engine that its easily modable. They design the game so its components are modular and easily updatable... so yeah, theres not much that can be done about that.

Anyways! This topic is wiiide open for a sicko to pipe up and post something disturbing, so i move for this thread to be locked. Mr admin?

[BioShockWins]

:o Nude skins are weird. Just watch some porn.

I'll say... at least about the first part... *the walls have ears..*


But anyway, I'd love to learn to mess with editors again if they put them in the game... I think it would be a great project to try to retexture the Tommy Gun or whatever. :)

[Raveness]

This thread has run its course. Uses of an editor are not the legal responsibility of the developers or publishers.