PDA

View Full Version : The new TR's maturity level's effect on TRF


Phlip
12-12-10, 22:09
Do you think it'll have one? If there's swearing in the new TR, do you think the astonishingly over-tight censorship on the most mild of words might be lifted (by about an atom if we're (excruciatingly) lucky)?

What other effects do you think it might have?

Well? Don't just sit there, click the ****ing Quick Reply or Post Reply button (whatever floats your boat). Why are you still reading this post? :cen:

Tony9595
12-12-10, 22:10
I say that if the game is gonna be +18, no one below 18 should be allowed here :ton:

SkyPuppy
12-12-10, 22:11
i... i don't know! WHY THE **** ARE YOU YELLING AT ME!?

but seriously, about the whole cussing stuff... i very much doubt it.

trlestew
12-12-10, 22:12
Considering some games which have a chat function censor words that the NPC's can say...I doubt it.

trXD
12-12-10, 22:20
Nah, I doubt it. If that was to happen everyone below 18 (half the forum) would have to be removed.

TombRaiderLover
12-12-10, 22:27
I can't imagine it having an effect. I'm a member of a very busy Blu-ray forum and though it's perfectly acceptable to discuss films rated 18+, the forum is still aimed at all ages and swearing and overly graphic content isn't permitted.

Ward Dragon
12-12-10, 22:32
I can't imagine it having an effect. I'm a member of a very busy Blu-ray forum and though it's perfectly acceptable to discuss films rated 18+, the forum is still aimed at all ages and swearing and overly graphic content isn't permitted.

That's pretty much what I think will be the case here too :) I mean, Alister says ******* in Legend but it's still censored :p I doubt the entire forum would suddenly change the rules simply because Lara might possibly swear a bit.

Chocola teapot
12-12-10, 23:17
Lmao.

Same old, Same old... I should Imagine.

:p

just*raidin*tomb
12-12-10, 23:40
I can't imagine the hostility to be any worse than it is right now.

Uzi master
13-12-10, 00:00
That's pretty much what I think will be the case here too :) I mean, Alister says ******* in Legend but it's still censored :p I doubt the entire forum would suddenly change the rules simply because Lara might possibly swear a bit.

you do know lara swore in AoD right?:ton:

honestly though, what 13-year old hasn't heard profanities before?
If some of my conversations with my friends were posted on here I would probably be banned within five seconds :whi:

Phlip
13-12-10, 00:21
you do know lara swore in AoD right?:ton:

When? All she said was "hell".

Love2Raid
13-12-10, 00:23
Nah, I say keep it the way it is. I visit other forums where nothing is censored, and itīs an assault to the eyes.

Sure, the games are getting more mature, but are we? ;)

Lara_Fan_33
13-12-10, 00:27
i was thinking about this also, and im hoping that the M rating wont mean that people under 18 wont be alowed on this forum. if that happens ill probably die, litterally. :( but hopefully everything remains the same :)

Melonie Tomb Raider
13-12-10, 00:27
I say that if the game is gonna be +18, no one below 18 should be allowed here :ton:

I disagree. It's 17+ in America, not to mention, a lot of people come here who have played the classics as well. That would be unfair for make it 18+ in this forum, in my opinion.

We have some awesome teenagers here, I'd hate to see them go!

Legend of Lara
13-12-10, 00:30
When? All she said was "hell".

She also said "damn it" at one point.

...

Neither of which are censored. Because the "swearing" in AoD was really mild.

So yeah.

Melonie Tomb Raider
13-12-10, 00:31
She also said "damn it" at one point.

...

Neither of which are censored. Because the "swearing" in AoD was really mild.

So yeah.

The original AOD script was intended to be rated M and had a lot more swear words, but they clearly toned it down. :p

Quasimodo
13-12-10, 00:35
The perfect solution would be to tweak the censor to replace fighting words with inert, buttery fluff. Observe:

**** you! That ******* Nathan Drake ain't got nothin' on our badass ledge-hopping *****.

*magic sparkle*

Gently caress you! That bunnypuff Nathan Drake ain't got nothin' on our cottony-soft ledge-hopping muffincup.

Love2Raid
13-12-10, 00:37
I say that if the game is gonna be +18, no one below 18 should be allowed here :ton:
How old is Mad Tony again? :mis:

lol
The perfect solution would be to tweak the censor to replace fighting words with inert, buttery fluff. Observe:

**** you! That ******* Nathan Drake ain't got nothin' on our badass ledge-hopping *****.

*magic sparkle*

Gently caress you! That bunnypuff Nathan Drake ain't got nothin' on our cottony-soft ledge-hopping muffincup.
:vlol:

Paddy
13-12-10, 00:38
The original AOD script was intended to be rated M and had a lot more swear words, but they clearly toned it down. :p

That sucks, I wanted the uncensored stuff :(
I hate when games get watered down and censored.

Melonie Tomb Raider
13-12-10, 00:39
That sucks, I wanted the uncensored stuff :(
I hate when games get watered down and censored.

AOD had to be rushed, period. So that's probably one reason why they just toned it down and went the easy route. Can't say that I blame them, considering they had to rush a game out without the proper time to polish it.

Spong
13-12-10, 00:42
Mother****ing ***** of a **** with **** all over ***** up the **** ******* Lara grabs ********.

^^None of that should ever be uncensored :mis:

The forum's awesome enough as it is :yah:

Paddy
13-12-10, 00:42
AOD had to be rushed, period. So that's probably one reason why they just toned it down and went the easy route. Can't say that I blame them, considering they had to rush a game out without the proper time to polish it.
Guess that has to be one of the few things I hated about AOD is the fact it was rushed out like it was.

Mother****ing ***** of a **** with **** all over ***** up the **** ******* Lara grabs ********.

^^None of that should ever be uncensored :mis:

The forum's awesome enough as it is :yah:

When its censored its more amusing then anything lol
But words have more power and meaning if theyre not censored. To me they do.

Ward Dragon
13-12-10, 00:48
i was thinking about this also, and im hoping that the M rating wont mean that people under 18 wont be alowed on this forum. if that happens ill probably die, litterally. :( but hopefully everything remains the same :)

I'm sure that the TR9 section will remain public :) After all, we allow discussion of M-rated games in the Videogames section and that's fine as long as people don't post something that would break the rules regardless of whether it's about a game or not.

Melonie Tomb Raider
13-12-10, 00:49
Guess that has to be one of the few things I hated about AOD is the fact it was rushed out like it was.


Yeah, it sucked. :/ Core wanted more time to work on it, but weren't able to because Eidos pushed it. Both were put in a difficult situation, though. Given the fact that it was not long before Eidos has to sell itself to Sci, they probably didn't have the funds to keep AOD in development for as long as it should have been.

Lara_Fan_33
13-12-10, 00:52
I'm sure that the TR9 section will remain public :) After all, we allow discussion of M-rated games in the Videogames section and that's fine as long as people don't post something that would break the rules regardless of whether it's about a game or not.

oh well thats good :D
thanks :)

Phlip
13-12-10, 01:20
I ONLY think the F and C words should be censored. Everything else is mild and are in 12+ rated films. You have to be 13 to join, too.

Pietras
13-12-10, 01:23
AOD had to be rushed, period. So that's probably one reason why they just toned it down and went the easy route. Can't say that I blame them, considering they had to rush a game out without the proper time to polish it.

Rush? They were working on it for 4 years. There's no such thing as 'rushed' after that long developement.

Uzi master
13-12-10, 01:28
Rush? They were working on it for 4 years. There's no such thing as 'rushed' after that long developement.

first: it was three years
second: it depends on how much content is in the game, as well as their resources
third: the first year half the team was working on Chronicals

Catapharact
13-12-10, 01:31
Rush? They were working on it for 4 years. There's no such thing as 'rushed' after that long developement.

Exactly. I think AOD fans need to realize just how bad that game really is. Its not development time that was the issue... It was the game concept itself. It was stinker then a diaper on a baby who just consumed a cup load of laxatives.

Ward Dragon
13-12-10, 01:32
Rush? They were working on it for 4 years. There's no such thing as 'rushed' after that long developement.

But the poor organization meant that they had to rush towards the end of the game's development. The experienced members of Core were forced to work on TR5 for the first year of AOD's development, leaving the newer members of the team to come up with the foundations for the game which they had trouble doing. Once the experienced members joined the AOD team they found the development to be a mess of ideas without too much organization for how to turn it all into a coherent game. They developed their own engine instead of licensing one, so that probably ate up a lot of time and contributed to the bugs. They had to redo the controls because they somehow didn't know that Sony would automatically reject any PS2 game that didn't use analogue sticks instead of the D-pad for movement. And finally towards the end Eidos promised them an extra year to finish the game, so Core planned accordingly, and the Eidos took it back halfway through and wanted them to finish the game half a year sooner than they were expecting. That meant that they had to rush and didn't have time to polish it. If Eidos hadn't promised them the full year in the first place, they probably would have decided to cut out a few things and therefore have more time to polish what was left. But really, I think the lack of organization overall is due to both Core and Eidos, and it's such a shame that AOD didn't get made properly because a lot of the ideas were really good (just poorly implemented or obviously missing pieces in the final version of the game).

Pietras
13-12-10, 01:32
first: it was three years
second: it depends on how much content is in the game, as well as their resources
third: the first year half the team was working on Chronicals

first: It was 4 years, they started before TLR was released
second: they had resources and cash, they hired freaking London Symphony Orchestra for the score. If they mismanaged those resources, it was only their fault.
third: half of the team wasn't working on Chronicles, only about 10 people that worked on AOD worked on Chronicles, check the credits on booklets, and they were doing that for 8 months not a year.

Spong
13-12-10, 01:39
Rush? They were working on it for 4 years. There's no such thing as 'rushed' after that long developement.

There is when the team constantly kept missing deadlines (a well-documented fact). As long as it was, four years wasn't enough. Eidos was at fault for forcing the release and Core was at fault for overreaching themselves.

Pietras
13-12-10, 01:51
There is when the team constantly kept missing deadlines (a well-documented fact). As long as it was, four years wasn't enough. Eidos was at fault for forcing the release and Core was at fault for overreaching themselves.
Ever considered Eidos could bankrupt if they kept the developement process even longer? This game had to be finally released. By the state it was released in, I doubt there would ever be enough time for Core to finish it.

But the poor organization meant that they had to rush towards the end of the game's development.
Their fault.

The experienced members of Core were forced to work on TR5 for the first year of AOD's development, leaving the newer members of the team to come up with the foundations for the game which they had trouble doing. Once the experienced members joined the AOD team they found the development to be a mess of ideas without too much organization for how to turn it all into a coherent game.
First of all Chronicles was developed only for 8 months. Second, Eidos didn't tell the studio which members should work on which game. The Smith brothers made these decisions. So if they decided less-experienced team should be working on a new PS2 game instead of Chronicles, it's only their fault.

They developed their own engine instead of licensing one, so that probably ate up a lot of time and contributed to the bugs.
Their mistake, not Eidos.

They had to redo the controls because they somehow didn't know that Sony would automatically reject any PS2 game that didn't use analogue sticks instead of the D-pad for movement.
Lul what? PS2 was release on March 2000, more than 3 years prior's AoD's release. This excuse makes absolutely no sense. And if we ASSUME it was somehow true, again other developers somehow managed to release succesful games on PS2 (much earlier at that). So really, who actually fawked up?


And finally towards the end Eidos promised them an extra year to finish the game, so Core planned accordingly, and the Eidos took it back halfway through and wanted them to finish the game half a year sooner than they were expecting. That meant that they had to rush and didn't have time to polish it. If Eidos hadn't promised them the full year in the first place, they probably would have decided to cut out a few things and therefore have more time to polish what was left.
A rumor report from Game Bunker is now considered a FACT? This game was delayed countless times and most importantly, was already hella long in the developement. 4 years. And by looking at the state it was released, not even another year would be enough to make it work at least good.


But really, I think the lack of organization overall is due to both Core and Eidos, and it's such a shame that AOD didn't get made properly because a lot of the ideas were really good (just poorly implemented or obviously missing pieces in the final version of the game).
Yes, they had some great ideas. But not one of them was executed well. Really, the reality is they would never pull of this game, even if they had 10 years.

Spong
13-12-10, 01:55
Ever considered Eidos could bankrupt if they kept the developement process even longer?

So, Eidos is blameless then?

Pietras
13-12-10, 01:57
So, Eidos is blameless then?

In this case, I failt to see any wrong decisions from them. They provided Core with big budget and more than enough time to complete a great game. They even delayed the game for them. Everything a publisher should do.

Sgt BOMBULOUS
13-12-10, 02:03
Anyone ever notice that in the Wikipedia article for AOD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_Raider:_The_Angel_of_Darkness) the plot is one gigantic, rambling paragraph? With the cult following this game has, I'm surprised no one has stepped forward to clean it up a bit.

peeves
13-12-10, 02:09
I think AOD was so left out of so much no wonder it wasn't that successful. Even i didn't care for AOD that much compared to TR1-4. And i didn't know the original script for AOD was rated M.

Ward Dragon
13-12-10, 02:20
A rumor report from Game Bunker is now considered a FACT?

I could have sworn I read it in an interview from an ex-Core employee.

But anyway, I wasn't defending Core. I was simply saying that AOD was definitely rushed, but I think the blame belongs to both Core for not having better organization and Eidos for not keeping better track of what was going on (if Core was really as disorganized as they seem to have been from the interviews I've read about the development of AOD, then Eidos should have stepped in and demanded some kind of outline or plan before granting any extensions).

ozzman
13-12-10, 02:21
if we where to post videos, we should probaly put Warnings on the thread , such as [warning, gore] or something like that, but i think words should just stay the way it is

Johnnay
13-12-10, 02:31
I could have sworn I read it in an interview from an ex-Core employee.

But anyway, I wasn't defending Core. I was simply saying that AOD was definitely rushed, but I think the blame belongs to both Core for not having better organization and Eidos for not keeping better track of what was going on (if Core was really as disorganized as they seem to have been from the interviews I've read about the development of AOD, then Eidos should have stepped in and demanded some kind of outline or plan before granting any extensions).
and as well as the fans... because they wanted a TR So badly and Core was obviously working on AOD. But because the fans were really impatient to wait that long for AOD after TR4 was released Hence which that reason is why Chronicles was made, and because of that AOD's release took much longer than expected... so hence the TR Fans themselves get a slice of the blame but Eidos gets most of it IMO:)

Pietras
13-12-10, 02:38
I could have sworn I read it in an interview from an ex-Core employee.
Nope, it was a report on Game Bunker based on "close sources" (so they said) and it made simply zero sense. It stated that Eidos told Core in summer 2002 to finish the game a year earlier. But the game was officially set for November 2002 the day it was officially announced, on March 20 (which is the day SPRING begins lol). Furthermore, it's more than obvious that if the game was actually set for late 2003, it would never be revealed in early 2002.

But anyway, I wasn't defending Core. I was simply saying that AOD was definitely rushed, but I think the blame belongs to both Core for not having better organization and Eidos for not keeping better track of what was going on (if Core was really as disorganized as they seem to have been from the interviews I've read about the development of AOD, then Eidos should have stepped in and demanded some kind of outline or plan before granting any extensions).
Yeah, I'm sure Smith brothers just told Eidos heads how badly disorganized they were.

patriots88888
13-12-10, 02:38
What effects? Only as a result of a single game, because of some occassional foul language? Don't be so redunkulous. I think you are way overreacting.

AOD had to be rushed, period. So that's probably one reason why they just toned it down and went the easy route. Can't say that I blame them, considering they had to rush a game out without the proper time to polish it.

If buyers hadn't been so rushed to get their copy :whi:... I purchased AOD in late August of 2003 for the PS2 and I didn't experience any bugs, issues, or any of the problems that so many others seemed to have. Patience is a virtue and good things come to those who wait is true. -_-

Paddy
13-12-10, 02:39
What effects? Only as a result of a single game, because of some occassional foul language? Don't be so redunkulous. I think you are way overreacting.



If buyers hadn't been so rushed to get their copy :whi:... I purchased AOD in late August of 2003 for the PS2 and I didn't experience any bugs, issues, or any of the problems that so many others seemed to have. Patience is a virtue and good things come to those who wait is true. -_-

Exactly :tmb: well said.

Alpharaider47
13-12-10, 03:04
you do know lara swore in AoD right?:ton:

honestly though, what 13-year old hasn't heard profanities before?
If some of my conversations with my friends were posted on here I would probably be banned within five seconds :whi:
That's not a good argument for removing the censor :p

Ward Dragon
13-12-10, 03:28
Yeah, I'm sure Smith brothers just told Eidos heads how badly disorganized they were.

And Eidos really had no clue after Core kept missing deadlines? They had to have known something was going on. I believe developers should have creative freedom, but I'd be really shocked if the publisher wasn't at least keeping track of what's being done with their money :p If it looks like the development process has become a disorganized trainwreck, then I think the publisher would be well within their rights to get involved and enforce some kind of structure to focus the development and get the game finished (and I don't just mean shoving the game out onto the market full of bugs).

MattTR
13-12-10, 03:43
I doubt much will change, as the series is aging so is the fan base. :ton:

Mikky
13-12-10, 05:57
Do you think it'll have one? If there's swearing in the new TR, do you think the astonishingly over-tight censorship on the most mild of words might be lifted (by about an atom if we're (excruciatingly) lucky)?

What other effects do you think it might have?

Well? Don't just sit there, click the ****ing Quick Reply or Post Reply button (whatever floats your boat). Why are you still reading this post? :cen:

That was such a random (a quite fitting :p) reaction! :vlol:

I've actually been thinking about this for a while now. I doubt Justin would lift the censors completely, but maybe he'll restrict the TR2011 section to 18+ people only? :eek: Yikes! =/

scremanie
13-12-10, 06:03
I say we decapitate anyone under 15. http://i844.photobucket.com/albums/ab10/scremanie/user_33293_KTENCGY7-1.gif

Too harsh? Okay... maybe just leave it the way it.. :pi:

tampi
13-12-10, 08:06
So this thread is talking about? :confused:

If a child ten years old, for example, still has never heard a bad word, or have a hearing problem, or did not live in the civilization that surrounds us.

But perhaps never in his life, thank God, see anyone die bleeding or exploding, or dismembered or .....
Likewise we could talk about seeing someone naked.

I don't know, this double standard is a big problem.:confused:
I guess every culture has its scales. As each family. As each person.

Capt. Murphy
13-12-10, 09:02
We're possibly worrying about dirty words when there are half dirty/suggestive pics for avatars by some users?... :confused:

A bit too late for that.

scremanie
13-12-10, 09:05
LOL! someone exploding!! :vlol:

igonge
13-12-10, 12:04
Nothing will change.

tomblover
13-12-10, 12:16
Dude, I nearly cried when "crap" and "damn" were censored on GoL's chat.

Too TRF-friendly. It seriously made me squeamish.

LightningRider
13-12-10, 12:31
Nah, I want it to stay the same. Nothing's improved when you remove the swear filters, really.

Avalon SARL
13-12-10, 12:50
Well, I believe that younger TRF members should not be allowed into the Tomb Raider 2011-2012 sub forum :D:tea:

Kidding... It is their business to view it or not, but they will spoil themselves :p

EscondeR
13-12-10, 12:53
If the game contains swearing, nobody squeezes your ****s to swear while discussing it :mis:

:p

interstellardave
13-12-10, 13:01
No major effect whatsover, I'm sure. Violent, graphic, imagery will likely be presented as is; swearing in any videos will probably just contain a warning (or be censored). The only thing that would definitely be banned completely from display here would be nudity (if there was any, which I really doubt). I have my own thoughts about that hierarchy of choices but I don't have the motivation right now to argue against all of western society. :p

LNSNHGTDS
13-12-10, 13:05
There were already some swear words in Legend but no one seemed to care so I guess as a matter of swearing nothing will change :) .

Sir Croft
13-12-10, 14:12
The only effect I think it will have is on the fanbase. Older members are likely to join due to their - new - interest in Tomb Raider as the game is finally getting mature.

Endow
13-12-10, 14:39
.

scremanie
13-12-10, 14:49
You're joking, right?

Pietras
13-12-10, 15:40
It wouldn't be a bad idea to restrict Tomb Raider 2011 sub-forum for 17+.

Endow
13-12-10, 16:03
.

toxicraider
13-12-10, 20:12
I was thinking about this earlier.
Presumably there will have to be limits on posting material, since they could contain profanities or violence, although I'm not sure that would be permitted in MGC either.
I expect there will be a large mature section in MGC to discuss the more mature bits in detail. Having it exclusive to MGC would be pointless, as, let's face it, most kids here will play the game anyway, and other 18+ games have been discussed outside MGC. More importantly, if you limit the discussions to 18+, then visitors have to join and access MGC in order to read the threads, which would make the forum largely inaccessible to non-members.

Oh and, Mature doesn't necessarily mean 18+. Assassin's creed was rated M but is rated 13 in some countries, so it would be unfair and difficult to decide which rating dominates.

TheRCroft
13-12-10, 20:27
I was thinking about this earlier.
Presumably there will have to be limits on posting material, since they could contain profanities or violence, although I'm not sure that would be permitted in MGC either.
I expect there will be a large mature section in MGC to discuss the more mature bits in detail. Having it exclusive to MGC would be pointless, as, let's face it, most kids here will play the game anyway, and other 18+ games have been discussed outside MGC. More importantly, if you limit the discussions to 18+, then visitors have to join and access MGC in order to read the threads, which would make the forum largely inaccessible to non-members.

Oh and, Mature doesn't necessarily mean 18+. Assassin's creed was rated M but is rated 13 in some countries, so it would be unfair and difficult to decide which rating dominates.

Completely agreed :tmb:

And @Pietras, it shouldn't be necessary, ya'know, kids are not what they used to be, these days.
Nobody cares about the rating anyway. I see 12 year old children playing rated M games and they play it in a normal way. It would be just silly to keep young people away from the conversation of this Tomb Raider game. In fact, there's why the MGC exists for.

TRLegendLuver
13-12-10, 21:20
Meh. I still doubt it, seeing as this is a public forum. There are very few forums that allow no censorship.

ajrich17901
13-12-10, 21:22
In this case, I failt to see any wrong decisions from them. They provided Core with big budget and more than enough time to complete a great game. They even delayed the game for them. Everything a publisher should do.
Rush? They were working on it for 4 years. There's no such thing as 'rushed' after that long developement.

I just don't know what else to say to this besides...
eEhDZN0RFjw

Phlip
13-12-10, 23:00
Restricting sections (apart from MCG) would be stupid.

Pietras
13-12-10, 23:08
I just don't know what else to say to this besides...
eEhDZN0RFjw
Ohh look, someone (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=22922) ran out of arguments :)

trXD
13-12-10, 23:11
Piertrass, it was rushed, the developers themselves say so in every single post-AOD interview.

Love2Raid
13-12-10, 23:13
^
I don't think he disagrees on that. The question is, who is to blame?

(I don't know! :p)

Uzi master
13-12-10, 23:15
I just don't know what else to say to this besides...
eEhDZN0RFjw

EPIC WIN! :tmb:

Spong
13-12-10, 23:19
Ohh look, someone (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=22922) ran out of arguments :)

Oh look, someone ran out of maturity.

Mr GaGa
13-12-10, 23:27
There should not be an effect at all on the forums. I'm glad the next game will be rated M. If it was T then so much stuff would have to be cut out. As for foul Language, I expect a few F bombs here and there because If I was trapped on an island and scary things were chasing me I would be cursing out of my mind like crazy :p

Paddy
13-12-10, 23:29
Oh look, someone ran out of maturity.

Given thread title I see what you did there.

Spong
13-12-10, 23:30
Given thread title I see what you did there.

The irony is delicious.

Pietras
13-12-10, 23:32
Oh look, someone ran out of maturity.

Posting a stupid video instead of an actual argument? Yep, someone (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=22922) certinately did

Uzi master
13-12-10, 23:36
Posting a stupid video instead of an actual argument? Yep, someone (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=22922) certinately did

looks like someone ran out of good arguments :whi:

J/K none of your arguments were good

ajrich17901
14-12-10, 00:00
Posting a stupid video instead of an actual argument? Yep, someone (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=22922) certinately did

Aww thats cute I have a stalker :vlol:
It was meant as a joke, grow some and suck it up, and at least get your facts straight before posting, that'd be a huge plus.

trXD
14-12-10, 00:01
looks like someone ran out of good arguments :whi:

J/K none of your arguments were good

Aww thats cute I have a stalker :vlol:
It was meant as a joke, grow some and suck it up, and at least get your facts straight before posting, that'd be a huge plus.

Don't wind him up for the sake of it guys, it only makes you look like nobheads.

Phlip
14-12-10, 00:19
Don't wind him up for the sake of it guys, it only makes you look like nobheads.

I don't think that someone defending themselves is a knobhead.

Mr GaGa
14-12-10, 00:21
Where is this thread going exactly ?:confused: I just see arguing.

Sir Croft
14-12-10, 00:43
No. My point is what is meant by mature. The mature "rating"?

No, I'm talking about the mature approach the game is apparently taking. The rating is just a consequence of said approach.