Non-lethal options for on-foot combat

[Uthael]

Can we get something to knock out enemies without having to kill them? Even if that means having to do extra effort to incapacitate them if/when they wake up.

I just don't like killing other living beings. I imagine people not wanting their notoriety to rise would like this as an option, too.

Edit 1: WARNING: This has turned into a philosophical topic and includes disturbing thoughts. Do not continue reading if you see something you're not comfortable with.

Edit 2: Reading this thread, I learned some things about settlements so I just went and tested some things.
1) I tested this in an anarchy settlement. Supposedly you get no bounties from those no matter what you do. Turns out to be true.
2) Energy Link in illegal mode incapacitates targets without killing them. This is indicated by a small, static swirling stars icon next to the NPC's security level number.
3) Trying to kill an NPC after they've been stunned does nothing. They're as good as dead anyway and the icon might as well represent "died of electrocution".
4) I don't know if stunning an NPC in an non-anarchy settlement gives you bounties or notoriety.

 

[PilotB]

Use the tazer mode on the charging pistol to zap people into submission. It's as non lethal as the game's age rating allows but you're still getting notoriety from the omnipotent eye in the sky.

 

[Uthael]

Use the tazer mode on the charging pistol to zap people into submission. It's as non lethal as the game's age rating allows but you're still getting notoriety from the omnipotent eye in the sky.

Nah, that thing is Lethal with a capital L. You can kill a player with it, too. If they have no shields, nothing else matters. They die.

 

[metatheurgist]

No one actually dies. Some time later the Rescue Rangers (or whatever) pick them up and show them a rebuy screen.

 

[PilotB]

Nah, that thing is Lethal with a capital L. You can kill a player with it, too. If they have no shields, nothing else matters. They die.

Incapacitated if you chose to view it that way. Players never die they're recovered and decanted so functionally it's the same. As far as I'm aware the lack of a disable option is down to the quirks of international age ratings and they didn't want an R-18. Unless somehow the international Karen association has decided to chill it's unfortunately not a feature they can add beyond the imagine it's a tazer.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

This has been discussed before. Often. The running theory is that incapacitating NPCs isn't possible while maintaining PEGI 16. Incapacitating allows violence against defenceless characters, which would take it to PEGI 18. Probably also the reason why all personell is armed and immediately attacks you even if they are in pyjamas.

Not going to happen.

 

[CMDR Yates]

Wasn't there some kind of "knocked-out" indicator (a spinning stars icon or similar) when you looked at someone you'd zapped, even though the game treats it as a murder in every other sense. Maybe they took that out, but it was definitely there in Odyssey beta and it seemed like they had most of the functionality in place for non-lethal attacks but it was never fully implemented for the aforementioned reason.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Wasn't there some kind of "knocked-out" indicator (a spinning stars icon or similar) when you looked at someone you'd zapped, even though the game treats it as a murder in every other sense. Maybe they took that out, but it was definitely there in Odyssey beta and it seemed like they had most of the functionality in place for non-lethal attacks but it was never fully implemented for the aforementioned reason.

IIRC it was in the alpha and taken out for the relase.

 

[Uthael]

This has been discussed before. Often. The running theory is that incapacitating NPCs isn't possible while maintaining PEGI 16. Incapacitating allows violence against defenceless characters, which would take it to PEGI 18. Probably also the reason why all personell is armed and immediately attacks you even if they are in pyjamas.

Not going to happen.

Woah. OK, I did not know that murdering defenceless characters is more acceptable than incapacitating them.

I remember playing No One Lives Forever 2. You could kill or incapacitate NPCs and carry the bodies around. Incapacitated enemies would eventually wake up, I don't remember if you could tie them up. Just checked now, it's PEGI 16.

Wasn't there some kind of "knocked-out" indicator (a spinning stars icon or similar) when you looked at someone you'd zapped, even though the game treats it as a murder in every other sense. Maybe they took that out, but it was definitely there in Odyssey beta and it seemed like they had most of the functionality in place for non-lethal attacks but it was never fully implemented for the aforementioned reason.

I see. Well than... I guess I have a reason to roleplay it now.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

I did not know that murdering defenceless characters is more acceptable than incapacitating them.

That's the point. No Odyssey NPC is defenceless.

 

[SteveWW57]

Can we get something to knock out enemies without having to kill them? Even if that means having to do extra effort to incapacitate them if/when they wake up.

I just don't like killing other living beings. I imagine people not wanting their notoriety to rise would like this as an option, too.

They are pixels.

Unless you are in the camp of every pixel matters?

 

[Factabulous]

Pretty easy to do most mission in pacifist mode - some missions even call for you to do that.

 

[Jmanis]

That's the point. No Odyssey NPC is defenceless.

^^ This one. There's quite a big difference between ambushing and killing someone who is conscious and armed, but is simply unaware of your presence, versus killing somone who is unconscious (in the context of game classifications and, well crimes)

 

[Uthael]

^^ This one. There's quite a big difference between ambushing and killing someone who is conscious and armed, but is simply unaware of your presence, versus killing somone who is unconscious (in the context of game classifications and, well crimes)

If a player is going to kill an NPC, what's the difference between killing them from stealth and killing them while they're unconscious? They were equally armed and dangerous against the interaction. Does some country's law or PEGI nowdays treat killing from stealth as a more humane act?

I honestly don't get (and would like to know) why this game wouldn't be able to keep the 16 rating while other 16-rated games allow it.

They are pixels.

Unless you are in the camp of every pixel matters?

That's not a helpful argument nor does it contribute to the topic in any way. If it helps, I do like applying fire and explosions to pixels when pacifism fails.
That being said, I've killed plenty of NPCs by carpet bombing a non-hostile settlement with multiple Shock Mine launchers. The game allows it with it's current PEGI rating and I'm pretty sure it's a warcrime in many countries.
Still... I prefer leaving those pixels alive most of the time.

 

[Ned Flandalorian]

IIRC it was in the alpha and taken out for the relase.

It's still in the current game. Weirdly doesn't appear if you melee someone instead of zapping them.

 

[Jmanis]

If a player is going to kill an NPC, what's the difference between killing them from stealth and killing them while they're unconscious? They were equally armed and dangerous against the interaction. Does some country's law or PEGI nowdays treat killing from stealth as a more humane act?

I honestly don't get (and would like to know) why this game wouldn't be able to keep the 16 rating while other 16-rated games allow it.


That's not a helpful argument nor does it contribute to the topic in any way. If it helps, I do like applying fire and explosions to pixels when pacifism fails.
That being said, I've killed plenty of NPCs by carpet bombing a non-hostile settlement with multiple Shock Mine launchers. The game allows it with it's current PEGI rating and I'm pretty sure it's a warcrime in many countries.
Still... I prefer leaving those pixels alive most of the time.

So weird sentences to start my day with... I know far more about the difference between the legal and moral ramifications of killing conscious vs unconcious people than I do about PEGI.... but I'd call out the following with PEGI to start with.

• It's rules are loosely defined (deliberately to allow it to operate with discretion in "grey zones")
• It's inconsistently applied both because it's subjective, and very prone to human error where the impact of common errors is low[1]... and because sometimes people simply aren't thorough[2]
• It assesses impact on the individual user, rather than impact of the activity... cracking a planet with billions of inhabitants from a strategic very (low impact) vs a FPV killing of an individual in graphic detail (high impact), even though the former is a far, far greater atrocity.
• That doesn't mean the themes don't matter, it's just what the impact on the end user is; and
• How interactive something is drives a good part of this. A point and click 3rd person interface of "Use gun on person" is far less concerning (to PEGI) than an interface depiciting you look down the sights, taking a sight picture, aiming and firing the weapon.

As an example, I'll tell you now I can commit way, way worse atrocities in Commandos 2 than in Spec Ops: the Line... yet you won't hear any of that flavour controversy about Commandos 2 versus Spec Ops... and while there's reasons for that, the root cause is that they're inconsistently applied. Suffice to say if PEGI is OK with this in some games, but it would affect ED? Yep... probably doesn't make sense, but it is what it is.

But killing an unconscious person vs ambushing an unaware, armed person? Massive, massive difference. I'm not about to recite CIHL, suffice to say it's the fundamental basisfor why killing someone[3] unaware is totally fine, but killing an unconscious (helpless) person[4] is a breach of human rights. And therefore the depiciton of that matters here.

EDIT: Fundamentally, to your question of

what's the difference between killing them from stealth and killing them while they're unconscious? They were equally armed and dangerous against the interaction.

Wrong. If you jump out and say "boo" to someone and armed, conscious threat, they will attack you. They are not hors de combat. If you do the same to an unconscious but armed person, they will continue to be a lifeless sack of flesh... they are hors de combat. International Law has little care to you killing the first person, and will send you to the hague for the second.

Spoiler: Useless additional stuff

Combatants (people in the fight) die unaware all the time... drone strikes, long range strike, IEDs, digger Bloggs was probably just cleaning his rifle and having a feed when suddenly a long-range missile spreads him further than the jam on his toast. It's pretty expected... but if digger Bloggs had been taken off the front-line to a hospital to have his slight shrapnel graze dealt with, and an enemy soldier sneaks in to the hospital to finish the job, yeah that's war crime town.

If that's too unrelatable... think of the difference public perception might have to a shopkeeper shot dead to prevent an alarm being raised during a store robbery, versus the same shopkeeper being discreetly knocked unconscious, store robbed, alarm not raised, thief not identified, but then the thief decides "Yeah, but I'm gonna go back and put a bullet in their head anyway". Same outcome... but I'd wager very different public response... YMMV[5]. It's not even fair to say murder is murder in this case... in almost all sentences (and indeed, self defence cases), it's never what you do, it's the context and how you did it.

There's much better, real examples from games which wouldn't be appropriate for discussion to here, suffice to say, this stuff matters to classification boards, a lot, and it's irrelevant whether individuals might think it matters or not. And in this case, the difference is between simply ambushing and killing an aware, armed individual, and the indifferent execution of a helpless, unconsciouss individual. Even my language is different...

[1] a "common" error being 'you missed the fact one scene showed some blood and therefore it's violence rating shifts slightly', not 'you classified Fallout 4 as being suitable for preschoolers and found no violent content in it'.
[2] Because let's face it, the classification board isn't going to be as thorough as the streamer doing the 100% no-hit Dark Souls run.
[3] specifically a combatant
[4] because even if they were a combatant, they are now hors de combat, and protected like a non-combatant.
[5] Some of my friends balk at the fact I did a renegade run in Mass Effect 2... some forumites even cast personal moral judgement because I support the Empire in the game.

Question: Got some examples of PEGI 16 games where you can render someone unconscious and then kill the individual when helpless?

It's still in the current game. Weirdly doesn't appear if you melee someone instead of zapping them.

I am really that confident at one point enemies could rouse their comrades if found like this too.... but unfortunately I only have one experience where this was the case, and I definitely can't replicate it... this was very very early odyssey though.

 

[Screemonster]

And let's not get into the whole issues about "less lethal" weapons leading to the moral hazard of "It's not a lethal weapon so it's okay for me to initiate violence".

If the game had a mission type where kills weren't allowed but stuns were, or if stuns resulted in lower-than-murder assault bounties and no notoriety gain, you would absolutely see a rise in people just zapping NPCs for being in the same room as a mission objective, where currently they'll wait for the person to have their back turned or leave the room before raiding the locker / downloading the data.

You know, like pretty much exactly what happened when people figured out that if they go to anarchy settlements they can just blast anyone whose presence mildly inconveniences them with zero consequences.

 

[Jmanis]

And let's not get into the whole issues about "less lethal" weapons leading to the moral hazard of "It's not a lethal weapon so it's okay for me to initiate violence".

If the game had a mission type where kills weren't allowed but stuns were, or if stuns resulted in lower-than-murder assault bounties and no notoriety gain, you would absolutely see a rise in people just zapping NPCs for being in the same room as a mission objective, where currently they'll wait for the person to have their back turned or leave the room before raiding the locker / downloading the data.

You know, like pretty much exactly what happened when people figured out that if they go to anarchy settlements they can just blast anyone whose presence mildly inconveniences them with zero consequences.

Oh, but they're the bad guys! We can do whatever inhumane things we like to them XD

(and debate over lethal vs nonlethal vs less lethal vs less than lethal vs tool vs weapon vs something else entirely always make me chuckle)

 

[Morbad]

Laws--and the cultural mores that inspire them--are strange, often very contradictory, things.

That's the point. No Odyssey NPC is defenceless.

Surely, the best kind of technicality...

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaazFYTrQ_A

They are pixels.

Unless you are in the camp of every pixel matters?

Pixels are how a video game experience is conveyed. Some people want such depictions to support their personal preferences or enable the role-play of certain characters...even if those characters aren't quite bright enough to understand the implications of rendering people unconscious in hostile environments or fail to realize that the therapeutic index of blunt force trauma, electrical shocks, or anesthetic drugs potent enough to immediately incapacitate someone, in a combat setting, are rather marginal.

Question: Got some examples of PEGI 16 games where you can render someone unconscious and then kill the individual when helpless?

Old school Baldur's Gate and all the Infinity Engine CRPGs are PEGI 12 or 16. Oddly enough the more recent title is PEGI 18. Consensual relations with a furry? Clearly morally dangerous. /s Pouring magical flame on non-combatant children, whether or not you've first rendered them insensate through a punch to the head or a sleep spell? That's fine for twelve year olds.

Deus Ex is PEGI 16. Killed many a freedom fighter and annoying children in this game by bludgeoning them to death after knocking them out with tranquilizer darts, or tasing them, then tasing them a lot more.

Probably tons more, but that's what comes to my mind first.

And let's not get into the whole issues about "less lethal" weapons leading to the moral hazard of "It's not a lethal weapon so it's okay for me to initiate violence".

If the game had a mission type where kills weren't allowed but stuns were, or if stuns resulted in lower-than-murder assault bounties and no notoriety gain, you would absolutely see a rise in people just zapping NPCs for being in the same room as a mission objective, where currently they'll wait for the person to have their back turned or leave the room before raiding the locker / downloading the data.

You know, like pretty much exactly what happened when people figured out that if they go to anarchy settlements they can just blast anyone whose presence mildly inconveniences them with zero consequences.

"Lazy cop syndrome":

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24202/w24202.pdf

https://www.amnestyusa.org/reports/usa-excessive-and-lethal-force-amnesty-internationals-concerns-about-deaths-and-ill-treatment-involving-police-use-of-tasers/

Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant To Kill? | FRONTLINE

In hundreds of cases, officers weren’t taught or didn’t follow best safety practices for physical force and weapons, resulting in fatal consequences.

www.pbs.org

More and better less-than-lethal options do decrease injury rates, but have a marginal impact on total subject injuries, or fatalities, because those options mostly replaced lower level of force options (often including words). Biggest effect seems to be an improvement to officer safety. Also, police use of tasers kill, or contribute to the deaths of, roughly a hundred people a year in the States.

All these untrained, borderline illiterate, CMDR with 'less than lethal' weapons, in scenarios where the environment is inimical to life and most subjects have what are essentially lightly armored pressure suits as a result, should result in a comically high subject fatality rate.

That said, GalNet flooded with headlines like this, would be entirely in keeping with the settings supposed flavor.

"Pilots Federation training policies to be updated after 97% of licensed CMDRs polled fail to realize that high voltage electrical arcs in pure oxygen environments are bad m'kay"

 

[Jmanis]

Laws--and the cultural mores that inspire them--are strange, often very contradictory, things.

100%

Calling that out for context to my next comments being purely "just my thoughts"

Old school Baldur's Gate and all the Infinity Engine CRPGs are PEGI 12 or 16. Oddly enough the more recent title is PEGI 18. Consensual relations with a furry? Clearly morally dangerous. /s Pouring magical flame on non-combatant children, whether or not you've first rendered them insensate through a punch to the head or a sleep spell? That's fine for twelve year olds.

Fantasy/ magic games are always interesting because there's resurrection spells, therefore the argument can always be made that death has far less consequence. Nefarious me then looks to rimworld to document the potentially negative consequences of immortality, but i like not being banned

But i think it's the 3rd person view and low detail aspects that probably make them "ok"

Deus Ex is PEGI 16. Killed many a freedom fighter and annoying children in this game by bludgeoning them to death after knocking them out with tranquilizer darts, or tasing them, then tasing them a lot more.

Probably tons more, but that's what comes to my mind first.

I never played deus ex... it looks very "goldeneye" in its level of detail. It's also a 2000 release, which although there were plenty of video game controversies before then, was before GTA 3 which drew a lot more attention into this sort of thing.

As a, contrast, Fallout 2 and SWAT 2 both released in 1998, the common theme bring you could shoot and/ or blow up kids in an isometric view. Both penalise it, but afaict only fallout 2 censored or drew any controversy for it.... swat 2 went by fairly unnoticed... the key differences as far as i can tell being popularity.

Something something these things are always inconsistent.... that's just my thoughts but aware there's a litany of "but this" that can counter my points because these are inconsistently used.