Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #41
a loin cloth should be a craftable item made from 1 or two cloth :)
-
-
Maybe you spawn with a loincloth, but it's basically the same as pants - you can take it off if you want. And many will. And you know what? Fine with me. Whether or not their character has a certain lump of flesh on them shouldn't matter at all.
The argument that society dictates we wear clothes falls apart once you realize, essentially, this isn't normal society. It's a new, online, post apocalyptic survivalist society. Being naked here is normal and therefore accepted, and in some cases it's even a survival strategy (for instance, to fool others into thinking you're a fresh spawn)
-
Considering an option to turn nudity off, as gore can be turned off in many games could always be an option. We'll just see what they have to deliver.
-
Just out of curiosity; does anyone complaining about dicks NOT come from America?
Seems like it's all from one place that the issues stem.
-
-
Oh yeah, I forgot I can magically get cloth and magically throw pants into everyone's inventory.
-
In the end, the best thing to do is probably add an option to the game to disable nudity and maybe another for gore. Turning it on would render a loin-cloth in place of a penis on every avatar. I could care less, but I still think it doesn't make much sense to start fully naked and still have bandages and a torch. The rock I can understand, lol.
-
Okay, one. You shouldn't be playing games with a toddler in the room. Secondly I bet you are some sheltered boy who grew up with your parents telling you it's a perfect world out there. I am not defending the nudist's colony that is Rust, but dude, it's a part of the game, get over it. I find it funny. Hell my mom came in my room and my friend heard her talking so he ran up to my character and took off his pants. My mom just laughed. It is funny. If you don't like it then quit the game. Go back to playing CoD for all we care. Nudity isn't wrong and I am not sure where you got that, it is a part of the world. You have to get over it dude. It is a whopping, what? like 10 cloth to make pants... If you dont want to see other peopled Kadoodles then just make a lot of pants and hand them out. I, personally, don't make any armor until kevlar because people won't kill me as often because they will just think I am a freshie, while I gather for my 4 story home. Just get over it bro. The devs did it to keep the kids from playing the game which I like, I am not a fan of squeakers, this isn't CoD. Please just ignore the dicks. I honestly don't even see them anymore. When I see a nude, i just think, "oh, he must have just spawned." I dont even remember the fact his dangalang is out there swaying in the breeze.
-
Why does it need to make sense to be naked in a game?
Gary standing his ground on this makes me think Rust will end up being a great game as the devs wont pander to those with insecurities about the human form, casuals, console players and the other dirty "C" word: commercialization.
So many shit software companies "want CoDs audience" or to "Appeal to a wider audience" well I can safely say those companies produce shit games after riding the coattails of earlier successes.
See Morrowind-->Skyrim
or BF2--->BF3 or 4
Facepunch seems like it's my kind of company, and Rust is my kind of game.
LET THE DICKS FLY AROUND FOREVER!!!!!!
-
Morrowind* But yah I agree bro. If you can't get over the fact that the characters are naked then you are insecure with your sexuality. lol
-
That ignores the fact that most societies and cultures have differing feelings and norms about violence and nudity. The ratings groups (both movies and games) tend to agree.
-
And this is acceptable as it is? to me it's not. Violence should be far far more tabboo than the plain old human body.
I mean the model in game isn't even erect, I can just imagine the shit storm from the puritans if that ever happened, and yet still, seeing an erect dick is nothing compared to murdering someone. If you fail to see the difference in magnitude then, well, I give up.
-
False equivalence. Nudity is nudity. There is no 'simulated nudity' (yes, I know it's a computer game animation, but that is not what I am talking about with regards to 'simulated'). Violence, however, is simulated. We can tell the difference. It's why the nuts who claim that people are more violent because they play violent video games are ... nuts.
"Violence should be far far more tabboo than the plain old human body."
Well, that is your opinion, but it isn't the case today. Again, there is a difference between violence and simulated violence. It's not even that good of simulated violence -- no blood splatter, no body deformation, no impact response from the body being shot. I'd say the nudity is much, much more realistic than the violence.
Also, the nudity serves no purpose, whereas the violence does. That's the big thing with me. If the default unity model came with a loin cloth, I doubt we'd even be having this discussion.
-
I'm not sure where the "simulated nudity" argument came from as no one used that term before you did but if you really want to take the argument there then i'd have to disagree with you entirely. Your argument is that "simulated violence" is more acceptable because it's not very realistic and people can tell the difference between that and real life violence. Well, the nudity in this game isn't very realistic and I can certainly tell the difference between it and real life nudity. People's bodies don't move realistically and there isn't any fine detail like visible veins on them so if all it takes is to be distinguishable from the real thing to be simulated then it seems to me like there is such a thing as "simulated nudity."
I think you said it best yourself just a few posts ago.
It's hardly fair to acknowledge that fact when it suits you and then ignore it when it doesn't. There are plenty of cultures where violence actually is more taboo than nudity so your own argument works against you here.
If the nudity truly served no purpose in this game then you wouldn't be here talking about it. It sends a very potent message to everyone playing the game that you are out in this wilderness both naked and alone. You can't see that you're nude (without using console commands to go third person) but you know it from what you see when you run into others out there. This helps to instill a sense of urgency on the idea of fixing the situation you find yourself in if for no other reason than to deal with that "cold" icon in the lower right.
You can't just claim something has no purpose because you don't like it and/or think that same purpose could be achieved without it. The purpose is still there whether you wish to see it or not.
-
Have you ever heard of simulated sex? I didn't invent that term. I did apply it to nudity to say that it doesn't exist. If it were a thing, there'd be a term for it. Simulated things tend to be held to a different standard than non-simulated.
People don't make movies showing people actually being killed as part of the plot. People make movies where people pretend to get killed. Simulated violence ok, real violence, not so much. Most cultures have a higher maturity standard for watching porn as opposed to watching 'people grinding that aren't really having sex.' Simulated sex ok, real sex, a different standard.
I simply applied that same logic to nudity.
When a guy comes up to me with his junk hanging out, and I shoot him in the head, I pretended to kill him. I didn't pretend to look at a naked man, cartoonish or not, I really saw nudity. I participated in simulated violence. I probably confused things by talking about how realistic the violence is in Rust. Regardless of how realistic it is, it is still pretending to kill someone. You can't pretend to see nudity.
My point there was that as violence goes, Rust's isn't even that realistic, so you are comparing very unrealistic violence to fairly realistic nudity and saying 'well, both are taboo, so they are the same.'
Please name one culture where Rust is played that considers violence to be more taboo than nudity. I didn't think I would need to qualify my argument to include only those cultures that are relevant in the context, but I certainly can going forward.
Sorry, that makes no sense. In terms of game mechanics, the nudity has zero purpose. You can contrive whatever backstory and justification you want (really, a sense of urgency from seeing people naked?), but it doesn't change the fact that there are no game mechanic purposes for it, whereas there is for the violence.
Wow that was contrived. I could claim that the doors magically lock and unlock because of invisible fairies that sit on our shoulders, but that doesnt mean there is any higher purpose to the current door mechanics than 'that's just the easiest way to handle it for now.' Much like the nudity. It was easy to make naked guys run around, that's probably the default model. It would take work to add a loincloth, so there isn't one. Trying to pass it off as some early design decision rather than 'that's just the way it is' is disingenuous.
-
I disagree. It isn't a gameplay purpose, but it's still a purpose. It's a psychological one, and I'm sure it's the entire reason Garry decided we should be nude.
Starting out buck-naked in the middle of nowhere with just a rock for protection is the ultimate feeling of vulnerability. Contrast it to when we all looked like fully equipped soldiers - feels decidedly different, doesn't it?
Unity doesn't have a default model... o.O
-
There actually is a term for simulated nudity though it's actually used in relation to things like skin tone bodysuits which are used to provide the illusion of nudity where one isn't actually nude. That being said, the nudity is no more real (or important) than the violence. You just choose to place greater importance upon it because it makes you uncomfortable.
That's hardly a fair request to make considering I don't have access to information on every person to ever purchase and play Rust.
You seem to love dismissing an argument entirely simply because you don't agree with it. If you really just want to break it down to mechanics, you are nude because you aren't wearing anything in the game. End of story. Nudity justified by mechanics. I could have made that argument but I felt it was a little too blunt and simplistic to make the argument stick in your mind but since you want to focus on mechanics so much, there it is. The fact of the matter is that the underwear typically seen in games is what isn't justified by mechanics because they have clothing in the game but when you choose to take it all off, you're still wearing clothing.
As for your attempts to dismiss the nudity as "being the default model," you clearly haven't seen videos of the early alpha. The default model was a guy in full military issue Kevlar body armor. Adding nudity to the game along with the new individual armor models was clearly a choice which is reinforced by the fact that Gary is completely uninterested in discussing the issue.
-
It IS more taboo than nudity.
You go nude in public, they'll probably think you're drunk, haul you off to jail, and probably slap you with fines for it (*some* places may have you register as a sex offender, but that's more exception than rule).
You go murdering people in public, and it's a different story altogether - everyone is going to do all they can to put you away for life.
-
As amusing as I find this argument, even I know he was specifically referring to violence vs nudity of a virtual nature. Bringing the real world consequences of actually performing these acts into it doesn't really help support the argument against treating nudity as worse than violence in this case...
-
Oh, come on guys... it's just a naked 3D figure. I just wish they'd put in a female soon. :)
-
I realize it may not help the argument in favor of keeping nudity in Rust, but it does answer his question. He wanted one single culture which considers violence more taboo than nudity. There it is.
Actually, wait, I've got a better one.
Do a Google image search for "nyangatom tribe". Do the images of half-naked women make you uncomfortable? Because in that tribe, it's perfectly acceptable.
Also the Hamar tribe, and the Daasanach.
-
Unity has free generic assets, which are what Rust is using in most of the game.
Lots of people exaggerating this out to be a planned deliberate decision. The only decision is to not add a loin cloth, and no matter what he says, if you believe it is anything more than "it would require extra work better spent on something else", then you are fooling yourself.
Edited:
I said no such thing.
-
Well, one point that will have to be addressed are the problems surrounding Rust gameplay and YouTube's terms of service. At least one Youtuber already had his Rust video banned due to the nudity. I am sure other content producers will be facing similar issues.
-
The character model was made by their artists, INTENTIONALLY. Before it was a soldier from a game demo that shiped with Unity.
Actually, to cure your ignorance, how about I show you this blog post, from back when we were all still soldiers running around:
"One of the things I want to do is make it so you start naked, like a caveman. This should reduce PVP – because who wouldn’t run from a naked guy with an axe."
http://garry.tv/page/16/
-
The real questions is.... where are the female models and they better be nude too.
Any other discussion takes away from the flavor of the game; the reality of life and how it would be to start off with nothing in the wild. The loin cloth is a good idea regardless if people want to waste 1-2 cloth so that their friends cant see their actual e-peen thats fine with me.
-
Oh really? Then what was this?
Granted I showed several examples of cultures that DON'T play Rust - but it still proves a point that nudity being wrong isn't universal by any means.
-
I will stand partially corrected there. I would guess though that the best and/or only freely available "non fully clothed" model was the naked one, as opposed to one with a loin cloth.
I am not dismissing an argument. You are not making a good one. You believe that being naked adds something to the game. That is not the same as it being a game mechanic. Remove the nudity by adding a loin cloth. Do the game mechanics change? No. Remove the violence from Rust. Do the game mechanics change? Umm, yes.
As for the taboo in cultures thing, you are being intentionally pedantic. Europe and North America. These are where the servers are hosted, not in some random culture where simulated violence is considered more taboo than nudity, whether cartoon or otherwise.
Edited:
"Where rust is played"
The context changes a wee bit when you eliminate the qualification, allowing you to go google some random culture that fits your straw man argument.
-
I realize that I listed several cultures that don't play Rust (as edited above).
But why does that even matter? So they don't play Rust, big whoop. It still proves that nudity being wrong isn't even close to universal. Oh but they don't have computers to play Rust, so I guess they magically don't count.
-
Wow. You don't see the facetiousness in that statement?
"This should reduce PVP – because who wouldn’t run from a naked guy with an axe."
Ok, you got me, the real reason is that being naked reduces PvP. You win. And I thought it was some deep meaning about facing the harsh realities of being cold. It was so much simpler.
Does the video say that the model was made by their artists? I can't watch it.
If that is the case, I apologize. I really thought that they had a good excuse for the model being naked, like it was cheap and easy.
-
The fact that there are people on here saying that murder > nudity shows that it is relevant just as you feel your arguement is. I believe this discussion is trying to pull something into the world of rust that has no place here. I don't see any moral standards here; I see hopeless people grasping at the resources around them to slaughter anyone that happens to give them a wrong feeling. This is rust; the land of the damned were everyone came from nothing and struggles through starvation for the first 12 hours.
Rust- A world that is immersive, and if you were truly in this world; you would come to from an unattainable past - naked - hungry - ready to survive.
I do believe the ability to select sex should be implemented because I am a feminist and believe that a woman could survive just as well in our world as we can.
Edit: If anything make the model sexless, like a ken-like doll. or barbie(minus breasts).
-
Yeah, and if I were arguing that nudity is universally wrong, you would have a really good point.
As it stands, I wasn't, so you weren't.
In Western culture, simulated violence is more acceptable than nudity, i.e., in movies and video games, violence is more widely accepted than nudity. The maturity requirement for experiencing both tends to be higher for nudity. This can be seen in the ratings systems for both.
-
I wonder, would this discussion have happen'd when the characters would've been female instead of male.
Also what's the reason people don't want to be confronted with in-game nudity(dicks in this case)...
-
If you're naked you shouldnt have any inventory space besides your hands. Where is he keeping this shit, his asshole?
-
[QUOTE=Eric^^;42789413]The fact that there are people on here saying that murder > nudity shows that it is relevant just as you feel your arguement is.[QUOTE]
No, it just shows that they are arguing a straw man, because I am not arguing that nudity > murder.
CyborgT at least understands that part of the argument. I just disagree with his opinion about that particular point.
-
I think the fact that this topic is even up for discussion is hilarious.
-
My response was partially to the earlier comment that (paraphrasing here) "nudity is inherently wrong". Clearly it's not.
As to whether *game* violence is more acceptable than *game* nudity, you're right. For whatever reason, society has deemed simulated harmful acts more acceptable than simulated completely harmless acts.
If you were to make an argument that a loin cloth should be added so that videos aren't taken down from Youtube, I would perfectly agree with you. As it is, your argument so far has been nothing but "society says I should hate this", so I just cannot agree.
Don't get me wrong, when they first added nudity I was a bit uncomfortable (and so was my friend, also a Rust player). Kinda gotten used to it now, though.
-
Are you really trying to suggest that Unity provides a free nude character model but not a single one wearing any kind of underwear? Is that really what you're trying to say here? I mean, I don't actually know whether that would be a factual statement (and I doubt you do either) but that would seem like an extremely odd thing to do if it's true.
The game mechanics may not change by adding a loin cloth but it does make Rust just as mechanically illogical as every other game (for no other reason than that a lot of people are uncomfortable with nudity.) As I already stated, you aren't wearing anything so logically you should be nude.
You asked me about cultures where Rust is played, not where the servers are hosted. There is a difference. I'm sure there are plenty of people outside of Europe/US that have purchased/played Rust. They're just not numerous enough to justify their own dedicated server.
-
That was my point, well, except for 'completely harmless acts' part. You will notice in my arguments, I was not commenting on whether it was good or not, just that it IS.
No, I was simply trying to set the context for the argument and to debate the point Garry made that it was silly for people to be more upset by the nudity than the violence. It may his opinion that it is silly, and everyone on this forum could agree, but it doesn't change how society in general (in Western cultures, who are the primary players of this game) see it.
If you didn't accept my premise, which it didn't seem like most folks were, any conclusions drawn (Youtube videos, for example) wouldn't have been easy to make.
Edited:
Ha, well, you make a fabulous point there. And without admitting guilt, I will say that it was a possible conclusion I came too because 1) so many other assets were Unity freebies, and 2) I would have found it hard to believe that you would choose the naked one. I have long since realized it is pointless for me to try to guess at Garry's motives because he has a creative gene that I do not have.
-
"You can't argue with this because society 200 years ago was totally the epitome of human morals!"
-
I found the tweet where the model was previewed. I apologize for the parts of my argument where I suggested that it was probably a default model and/or not a deliberate design decision. I was 100% wrong and it was lazy research on my part.
Optimistic x 1
Agree x 1
Funny x 1
Informative x 1
Winner x 1
Disagree x 1
Dumb x 1
Artistic x 1
Late x 1
