I was talking about the specific ratings summary here: http://www.esrb.org/ratings/synopsis.jsp?Certificate=25787

Notice that it only mentions nudity within the context of cinematic sex scenes or the collectible cards. No mention of the fully naked Dryad or vampire chicks that you encounter during actual gameplay. That seems like a fairly glaring omission. Given that the ESRB derives most of their ratings based solely on videos, screenshots and descriptions of content provided by the publisher, it wouldn't surprise me if Atari just failed to mention the naked in-game characters. Considering that the director's cut was just an optional, digital-only patch released for a relatively obscure, PC-exclusive game that came out 2 years before, such negligence wouldn't pose much of a risk.

Anyhow, if The Witcher 2 (or any other game) has full nudity during actual gameplay, I'll accept that the ESRB has no problem with full nudity during gameplay in an M-rated game.

Jerykk wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 18:17:
Hmm, you're right, Steam is selling the Director's Cut now. I do have to wonder if the ESRB actually rated it or if they just copied and pasted the Enhanced Edition rating. It has the exact same rating summary as the regular Enhanced Edition and makes no mention of the in-game character nudity that's added by the Director's Cut.

No, the normal and enhanced releases say "partial nudity" while the Director's Cut says "nudity." You can compare them on the ESRB's website just by searching "The Witcher," all three come up.

Hmm, you're right, Steam is selling the Director's Cut now. I do have to wonder if the ESRB actually rated it or if they just copied and pasted the Enhanced Edition rating. It has the exact same rating summary as the regular Enhanced Edition and makes no mention of the in-game character nudity that's added by the Director's Cut. ESRB ratings tend to be pretty specific so it's weird that they'd fail to mention that.

In any case, I'm still waiting for an unpatched M-rated game that has full nudity during gameplay.

Jerykk wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 12:25:
There's a difference between the Enhanced Edition and the Director's Cut. The Enhanced Edition was still censored in the U.S. In order to turn it into the Director's Cut, you have to download a patch. This patch was never rated by the ESRB and the Director's Cut was never a full retail product.

*sigh*

The Director's Cut is now the version sold outright on digital stores. It has its own new rating, go to the Steam page and look. It was rated M by the ESRB. I don't know why you can't just accept this, and I refuse to google endlessly to find articles about it in some pointless exercise to show you you're wrong. There were articles and forum posts and other such things by the dev team talking about it getting an M rating though, which you could find if you are really that interested.

Except how many of those games had full, explicit nudity during actual gameplay? Alma was naked a lot in FEAR 2 but you only saw brief glimpses of her and she didn't actually have any nipples or genitals. There was a lot of nudity in Dante's Infero and GoW but again, no full nudity during actual gameplay. The Witcher had a completely naked Dryad during actual gameplay.

I think you're severely underestimating how much interactivity changes one's moral perception. Movies routinely show children getting killed, women getting raped, etc, yet those movies get away with an R rating because those scenes are completely non-interactive. If a game portrayed any of those things in an interactive context, you can be guaranteed that it would get an AO rating these days. Just look at the Hot Coffee debacle. The sex mini-game wasn't especially explicit. You didn't see any genitals, penetration, etc. I don't think your character even got naked. The whole thing was less explicit than the typical R-rated sex scene. However, as soon as that mini-game was discovered, the ESRB slapped an AO rating on GTA:SA. Right now, games can get away with showing tits during gameplay while maintaining an M rating. However, once you show full nudity during gameplay, that's going to get you an AO and an AO rating will get you banned from every console and most retail stores.

Except you don't get an AO rating automatically for that, since The Witcher: Director's Cut has an M rating.

Edit: The ESRB website even has a rating labeled "The Director's Cut" for God's sake: http://www.esrb.org/ratings/synopsis.jsp?Certificate=25787

Not true, it was rated M by the ESRB and is sold digitally on services like Steam. It's been talked about many times.

There's a difference between the Enhanced Edition and the Director's Cut. The Enhanced Edition was still censored in the U.S. In order to turn it into the Director's Cut, you have to download a patch. This patch was never rated by the ESRB and the Director's Cut was never a full retail product.

There is no guideline beyond that, and while MS and Sony could technically choose to deny certification to a game they deem improper despite it having an M rating I have seen no evidence of that being a danger here. Games like God of War, Dante's Inferno and even FEAR 2 have had strong sexual content and lots of nudity but MS and Sony never batted an eye.

Except how many of those games had full, explicit nudity during actual gameplay? Alma was naked a lot in FEAR 2 but you only saw brief glimpses of her and she didn't actually have any nipples or genitals. There was a lot of nudity in Dante's Infero and GoW but again, no full nudity during actual gameplay. The Witcher had a completely naked Dryad during actual gameplay.

I think you're severely underestimating how much interactivity changes one's moral perception. Movies routinely show children getting killed, women getting raped, etc, yet those movies get away with an R rating because those scenes are completely non-interactive. If a game portrayed any of those things in an interactive context, you can be guaranteed that it would get an AO rating these days. Just look at the Hot Coffee debacle. The sex mini-game wasn't especially explicit. You didn't see any genitals, penetration, etc. I don't think your character even got naked. The whole thing was less explicit than the typical R-rated sex scene. However, as soon as that mini-game was discovered, the ESRB slapped an AO rating on GTA:SA. Right now, games can get away with showing tits during gameplay while maintaining an M rating. However, once you show full nudity during gameplay, that's going to get you an AO and an AO rating will get you banned from every console and most retail stores.

Oh no, they used the word "console." It's the end of the world. Oh wait, the game looks damn fantastic and has even more awesome features than the first game. Nevermind.

Dev wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 05:42:

Jerykk wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 04:39:
Are you sure about that? The version of the game that the ESRB rated was the edited version. The unedited version was never released in the U.S., as far as I know.

I believe the director's cut version sold everywhere now (including steam) is the full uncensored unedited one.

A patch was released to make the DC version uncensored in the US.

Jerykk wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 04:39:
Are you sure about that? The version of the game that the ESRB rated was the edited version. The unedited version was never released in the U.S., as far as I know.

I believe the director's cut version sold everywhere now (including steam) is the full uncensored unedited one.

Jerykk wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 04:39:
EDIT: After doing some research, it appears that Atari eventually released a Director's Cut patch for the U.S. version of The Witcher that uncensored the game. However, this patch was not rated by the ESRB and the Director's Cut version of the game was never officially sold.

Not true, it was rated M by the ESRB and is sold digitally on services like Steam. It's been talked about many times.

As for the rest of your post my point was that console guidelines are basically "get an M rating." There is no guideline beyond that, and while MS and Sony could technically choose to deny certification to a game they deem improper despite it having an M rating I have seen no evidence of that being a danger here. Games like God of War, Dante's Inferno and even FEAR 2 have had strong sexual content and lots of nudity but MS and Sony never batted an eye.

The Witcher was "censored" by Atari for PR concerns, it had nothing to do with any ratings board. The ESRB was not given the unedited version until way after release and at that time gave the unedited game an M rating, same as the edited version and the same as Call of Duty gets.

Are you sure about that? The version of the game that the ESRB rated was the edited version. The unedited version was never released in the U.S., as far as I know.

All the console companies care about is that the game is rated M or below. I suppose you could argue the more mainstream audience of consoles could increase PR concerns, but it has nothing to do with the ESRB.

I'm a bit confused by your logic here. ESRB decides the ratings of games released in the U.S. Publishers have a pretty good sense of what the ESRB deems acceptable for each rating and insist that developers make the necessary changes in order to achieve their desired ratings. Whether or not the game is edited before or after submission to the ESRB is irrelevant. The edits are being made because of the ESRB's existence either way.

For example, if a developer wants to add an explicit sex mini-game, the publisher is going to say no. If a developer wants to let players kill children or pregnant women, the publisher is going to say no. The publisher will say no to these things long before the ESRB gets involved because they know that the ESRB will give the game an AO rating if these elements are included.

It's also important to keep in mind that the ESRB essentially exists as a PR tool for the videogame industry. It provides publishers with a way to deflect criticism by providing content warnings before you get to play games. If a parent gets offended that their 13-year-old saw tits in Duke Nukem Forever, 2K can simply point out that the game was clearly rated for 18-year-olds or older. ESRB ratings are not an exact science. Their standards reflect those of the general public. Before gaming became so mainstream, there were plenty of M-rated games that let you kill children. Fallout and Deus Ex, for example. However, with increased exposure comes increased scrutiny, which is why you aren't going to see killable children in any games anytime soon.

EDIT: After doing some research, it appears that Atari eventually released a Director's Cut patch for the U.S. version of The Witcher that uncensored the game. However, this patch was not rated by the ESRB and the Director's Cut version of the game was never officially sold.

This comment was edited on Apr 27, 2011, 04:59.

Jerykk wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 02:41:
You can get away with full frontal as long as it's only shown in a cinematic (and briefly at that). The Witcher had a completely naked Dryad during gameplay and you could stare at her as long as you wanted, which is why she had to be censored for the U.S. release. From what I've read, the nudity in The Witcher 2 is limited to cinematics, which would make sense as the game can't be released on consoles with an AO rating.

The Witcher was "censored" by Atari for PR concerns, it had nothing to do with any ratings board. The ESRB was not given the unedited version until way after release and at that time gave the unedited game an M rating, same as the edited version and the same as Call of Duty gets.

The unedited Witcher 2 got an M rating too, so it's fine for consoles. All the console companies care about is that the game is rated M or below. I suppose you could argue the more mainstream audience of consoles could increase PR concerns, but it has nothing to do with the ESRB.

You can get away with full frontal as long as it's only shown in a cinematic (and briefly at that). The Witcher had a completely naked Dryad during gameplay and you could stare at her as long as you wanted, which is why she had to be censored for the U.S. release. From what I've read, the nudity in The Witcher 2 is limited to cinematics, which would make sense as the game can't be released on consoles with an AO rating.

Zavy wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 02:38:

I'm not much familiar with the console world, but from what I understand and have seen, there's not many (any?) console games that have full frontal nudity.

dante's inferno had quite a bit of nudity as well.

Which still didn't float into full-frontal realms, and look at the negative attention it got.

I'm not much familiar with the console world, but from what I understand and have seen, there's not many (any?) console games that have full frontal nudity.

dante's inferno had quite a bit of nudity as well.

From what I've been seeing in the previews (Most recently on gamespot) the game looks very consolified. You have quick time events that auto-kill any enemy in one successful hit, a GUI that doesn't take advantage of the keyboard and a slimmed down skill system. It just reeks of console design decisions.

I'm still buying it, but I'm not expecting TW1.

Probably on corpses though, which doesn't really count.

All of this talk of nudity inspired me to browse the ESRB website. There are 20 games on the PS3 alone with nudity. It seems L.A. Noire will even have "fleeting images of pubic hair". So that's something to look forward to.

Dev wrote on Apr 26, 2011, 21:59:
I'm not much familiar with the console world, but from what I understand and have seen, there's not many (any?) console games that have full frontal nudity. I mean look at how the news went crazy over Mass Effect and that was only suggestive, not even real nudity. I doubt sony or MS is going to allow that on the consoles, so if it DOES hit consoles its likely to be censored.

Also, they did all the development for PC, so even if this does happen, at least the game won't have been consolized in its developing stages.

All they care about is it getting an M rating, which it did.

Anyway, I honestly couldn't care less about it getting a console version. All I care about is getting a good PC version which I am sure will be the case.

I don't think you know what full frontal means...

Dev wrote on Apr 26, 2011, 21:59:
I'm not much familiar with the console world, but from what I understand and have seen, there's not many (any?) console games that have full frontal nudity.

The God of War games did. Afro Samurai, too. There may be others.