Anyone else get their GTA San Andreas settlement checks yet?

[norkusa]

Last I heard, a judge said they didn't have pay these out but today I got a check in the mail today from the settlement administrator for $33.74 (had 2 copies, Xbox & PS2, both with original receipts). Came with a letter attached with a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo but basically said by cashing it, I basically agree to the terms of the settlement. No problem there.

Now I'm going to cash this and buy Episodes From Liberty City.

[Hawksmoor]

Last I heard, a judge said they didn't have pay these out but today I got a check in the mail today from the settlement administrator for $33.74 (had 2 copies, Xbox & PS2, both with original receipts). Came with a letter attached with a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo but basically said by cashing it, I basically agree to the terms of the settlement. No problem there.

Now I'm going to cash this and buy Episodes From Liberty City.

That check might end up being a nice piece of gaming history; you going to get it voided after cashing it and keep it?

[norkusa]

That's a good idea, I think I'll do that. With all the hoops they made people jump thru to get these checks, I can't imagine that many people got paid.

I'll put it the safe deposit box that came with my GTAIV CE so it'll finally get some use out of that thing.

[Bojay1997]

Are you sure you should be on this site or playing video games at all? To get the settlement, you had to swear the following under penalty of perjury:

You were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content;
• Would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content; and
• Upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to commit perjury to get a few bucks, especially from a company that makes some great games.

[Namnuta]

Are you sure you should be on this site or playing video games at all? To get the settlement, you had to swear the following under penalty of perjury:

You were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content;
• Would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content; and
• Upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to commit perjury to get a few bucks, especially from a company that makes some great games.

So true. But the leeches will do what ever they can to get money they :shameful: think they deserve. Really make me loose faith in people.

[kedawa]

LOL

It's free money and nobody gets hurt. Have fun!

[98PaceCar]

LOL

It's free money and nobody gets hurt. Have fun!

So where exactly do you think this money comes from?

[portnoyd]

So where exactly do you think this money comes from?

A faceless monolith of a corporation. Sign me up!

Seriously... perjury? Being lawful to a fault is just stupid.

[8-bitNesMan]

A faceless monolith of a corporation. Sign me up!

Seriously... perjury? Being lawful to a fault is just stupid.

Which in turn increases prices for all of us. Frivolous lawsuits that only make lawyers richer are what's just stupid...

[norkusa]

Are you sure you should be on this site or playing video games at all? To get the settlement, you had to swear the following under penalty of perjury:

You were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to modify and alter the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc to display the Hot Coffee content;
• Would not have bought the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas First Edition Disc had you known that consumers could modify and alter the game content; and
• Upon learning the game could be modified and altered, would have returned it to the place of purchase for a refund if you thought this was possible.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to commit perjury to get a few bucks, especially from a company that makes some great games.

I didn't commit perjury at all. A judge ruled against Take-Two Interactive in the settlement and everything in the claim I agreed to 100%. I did nothing wrong.

[98PaceCar]

A faceless monolith of a corporation. Sign me up!

Seriously... perjury? Being lawful to a fault is just stupid.

While I won't go quite as far as Bojay in my reasons for thinking this was a bad idea, I will say that it could have lasting effects that would be negative to gamers. If enough damage is done to the bottom line (unlikely, but possible given people's tendency to feel "entitled"), companies could start to limit their exposure to similar lawsuits and stop pushing the boundaries. I'm far from a fan of the series, but GTA would be boring as hell if it wasn't for the near limitless violence in it. If Rockstar/Take Two gets slapped enough times or for enough money, they could decide it's no longer worth it and start churning out the same rehashed crap year after year, not unlike EA.

I personally would rather see the boundaries pushed and developers willing to take risks as the end result will be much more interesting, but if people keep taking the rewards (profit) from the companies that do such things, there won't be any reason left to do it.

[98PaceCar]

I didn't commit perjury at all. A judge ruled against Take-Two Interactive in the settlement and everything in the claim I agreed to 100%. I did nothing wrong.

And yet you openly admit that you are going to take the settlement money and buy another product from not only the same developer, but from the same product family? You do realize it could have the same types of content in it that could futher offend you, right? I'd hate to see you waste your money on something like that, maybe you should consider a nice Wii family game or something a bit safer.

Oh wait, I know, you aren't really offended by the content. You just said you were (perjury) so that you could get the money (entitlement) that a judge said needed to be paid out based on someone else's definition of offensive (clearly, not yours as you are buying another version of the same product). That make much more sense.

[Bojay1997]

I didn't commit perjury at all. A judge ruled against Take-Two Interactive in the settlement and everything in the claim I agreed to 100%. I did nothing wrong.

Oh really? Let's take a quote from your post of January 2008 where you state the following:

Looks like the whole Hot Coffee thing is finally settled. People who bought the unpatched version of the game get up to $35 back if they still have original proof of purchase:

http://www.gtasettlement.com/

I still have my original receipts for the PS2 & Xbox versions of San Andreas but I don't know if I'm going to file a claim form. One of the requirements is that you must swear under penalty of perjury that you "were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to alter the GTA:SA first edition disc to display the Hot Coffee content" and "Would not have bought the GTA:SA first edition disc had I known the content could be modified".

You didn't seem offended then. You even seemed to have some hesitation based on the fact that you had to swear to the statements under penalty of perjury. You went on to joke about the fact that you bought both the PS2 and Xbox versions of the game. Did you all of a sudden become offended or did you intend to commit perjury all along? Based on the evidence in the previous post, I am leaning toward the latter.

[norkusa]

And yet you openly admit that you are going to take the settlement money and buy another product from not only the same developer, but from the same product family? You do realize it could have the same types of content in it that could futher offend you, right? I'd hate to see you waste your money on something like that, maybe you should consider a nice Wii family game or something a bit safer.

Oh wait, I know, you aren't really offended by the content. You just said you were (perjury) so that you could get the money (entitlement) that a judge said needed to be paid out based on someone else's definition of offensive (clearly, not yours as you are buying another version of the same product). That make much more sense.

Yes. As long as there's no Hot Coffee in Episodes, I have no problem with playing it. It's just San Andreas that offended me and I have every right to this settlement. Don't know why you have an issue with that.

[98PaceCar]

Yes. As long as there's no Hot Coffee in Episodes, I have no problem with playing it. It's just San Andreas that offended me and I have every right to this settlement. Don't know why you have an issue with that.

See above post from Bojay. I think that sums it all up nicely.

[Kamille01]

I don't know the ramifications that will result from norkusa's actions but in my opinion I think a few people here are overreacting.

However, I could be terribly wrong and norkusa could end up being arrested by the many federal agents that are currently checking this website. Or suffer an equally horrible fate that this thread makes me feel could happen.

Whatever happens, I guess he will get what he deserves?

[98PaceCar]

I don't know the ramifications that will result from norkusa's actions but in my opinion I think a few people here are overreacting.

However, I could be terribly wrong and norkusa could end up being arrested by the many federal agents that are currently checking this website. Or suffer a equally as horrible fate that this thread makes me feel like could happen.

Whatever happens, I guess he will get what he deserves?

Nobody here believes that the cops are going to show up and run Norkusa through the system. But, if anybody believes that lawsuits like this are victomless and have no ramifications, they are just fooling themselves. The simple fact is that as more and more people participate in lawsuits like this, the impact to the bottom line of the companies being sued is increased and they will eventually need to either raise prices (we pay $60 for new releases now) or stop taking risks in what they develop. Either way, there is a cost and we all get to pay it.

[Famidrive-16]

the many federal agents that are currently checking this website.

*quickly deletes posts about sega cd emulators*

[Kamille01]

Nobody here believes that the cops are going to show up and run Norkusa through the system. But, if anybody believes that lawsuits like this are victomless and have no ramifications, they are just fooling themselves. The simple fact is that as more and more people participate in lawsuits like this, the impact to the bottom line of the companies being sued is increased and they will eventually need to either raise prices (we pay $60 for new releases now) or stop taking risks in what they develop. Either way, there is a cost and we all get to pay it.

That's understandable.

Though I think the issue you're talking about isn't what this thread was made for. The first post simply asked if anyone received their check. It then evolved into what you're saying.

[portnoyd]

But, if anybody believes that lawsuits like this are victomless and have no ramifications, they are just fooling themselves. The simple fact is that as more and more people participate in lawsuits like this, the impact to the bottom line of the companies being sued is increased and they will eventually need to either raise prices (we pay $60 for new releases now) or stop taking risks in what they develop. Either way, there is a cost and we all get to pay it.

This is total bullshit. It is victimless.

For one thing, if companies raise prices of new games, it sure as hell won't be because of this lawsuit or any other. It'll be because of rising development and marketing costs.

Since when was a poorly done, only available by hacking mini-game "taking risks in what they develop"? Last I checked, hiding the mini-game is not taking a risk. It was a mistake not removing it from the game entirely. Also, the lawsuit was about sex, not violence. If you want the bar pushed on violence, it most definitely still is and no one gives a shit.

There is no cost. Consider it a freebie from our pussified society. Take your check, cash it and call it a fucking day.


If Rockstar/Take Two gets slapped enough times or for enough money, they could decide it's no longer worth it and start churning out the same rehashed crap year after year, not unlike EA.

Oh, you mean like Liberty City Stories, Vice City Stories, GTA Tales from Liberty City DLC, GTA Chinatown Wars....

[Bojay1997]

This is total bullshit. It is victimless.

For one thing, if companies raise prices of new games, it sure as hell won't be because of this lawsuit or any other. It'll be because of rising development and marketing costs.

Since when was a poorly done, only available by hacking mini-game "taking risks in what they develop"? Last I checked, hiding the mini-game is not taking a risk. It was a mistake not removing it from the game entirely. Also, the lawsuit was about sex, not violence. If you want the bar pushed on violence, it most definitely still is and no one gives a shit.

There is no cost. Consider it a freebie from our pussified society. Take your check, cash it and call it a fucking day.



Oh, you mean like Liberty City Stories, Vice City Stories, GTA Tales from Liberty City DLC, GTA Chinatown Wars....


As someone who early in my career used to work for a company that was put out of business by what was later discovered to be a frivolous lawsuit, I can tell you that it's a fact that meritless litigation kills jobs and innovation. Frivolous or meritless lawsuits also increase insurance premiums and the costs of litigation get passed onto the consumer directly and indirectly.

The only thing that was "victimless" here is the original situation itself. The mod couldn't even be accessed without going through all sorts of steps to download additional files, so it's not like nudity popped up and offended anyone.

I believe Norkusa committed perjury. While it is unlikely that his actions will result in punishment, I know that personally I would never deal with someone who had no problem lying and stealing from a company by committing perjury. I'm frankly shocked that people who have been members of the community here and gamers for many years would have no issue with committing a crime and further see no problem with someone doing so and then backtracking and lying about it here on the forum. There are lots of crimes which all of us could probably commit that won't result in punishment and just result in companies losing money (shoplifting, tort fraud, insurance fraud), but this is a community of gamers and collectors and we shouldn't condone or support conduct of that type.

[Porksta]

God I hate the term "victimless crime". The money would have gone elsewhere, so there is indeed a victim.

[98PaceCar]

This is total bullshit. It is victimless.

For one thing, if companies raise prices of new games, it sure as hell won't be because of this lawsuit or any other. It'll be because of rising development and marketing costs.

Sure, rising costs of development is one part of the puzzle. But I'm sure that each and every developer has a budget set aside just for lawyers and as cases like this mount, that budget will only increase. Who bears the cost of said increases, the end users. You can argue that it only cuts into the profits of the developer and on the surface, that's the immediate result. But it's naive to think that they are going to just laugh and write off the millions they lost due to this. It may not be made up on GTA IV, but it will be made up elsewhere. That elsewhere can only come from the end users, either in the form of increased prices directly or future product developed with a smaller budget. How can I be sure of this? Because the only way they make money is by selling product to gamers. That's the bottom line.


Since when was a poorly done, only available by hacking mini-game "taking risks in what they develop"? Last I checked, hiding the mini-game is not taking a risk. It was a mistake not removing it from the game entirely. Also, the lawsuit was about sex, not violence. If you want the bar pushed on violence, it most definitely still is and no one gives a shit.

There is no cost. Consider it a freebie from our pussified society. Take your check, cash it and call it a fucking day.

There is always a cost. Money doesn't just fall from the sky. I do agree with you that this is just another example of people whining until they get what they feel entitled to (re, the pussification of America). The whole lawsuit was pointless and a waste of resources as people that didn't like the content could just ignore it. Hell, they had to be an active participant utilizing illegal methods to even get to the content. But the costs of the defense as well as the costs of the settlement will eventually make it down to the end user. The more people that jump on the bandwagon, the more it costs everybody else.

[portnoyd]

Bojay, I really, really hope you are playing the "good cop" card to Nork's "bad cop" to show how ludicrous the whole situation is.


As someone who early in my career used to work for a company that was put out of business by what was later discovered to be a frivolous lawsuit, I can tell you that it's a fact that meritless litigation kills jobs and innovation. Frivolous or meritless lawsuits also increase insurance premiums and the costs of litigation get passed onto the consumer directly and indirectly.

Oh look. Bias. Please don't turn Nork into the personification of the lawsuit that made you lose your job.


I believe Norkusa committed perjury. While it is unlikely that his actions will result in punishment, I know that personally I would never deal with someone who had no problem lying and stealing from a company by committing perjury. I'm frankly shocked that people who have been members of the community here and gamers for many years would have no issue with committing a crime and further see no problem with someone doing so and then backtracking and lying about it here on the forum. There are lots of crimes which all of us could probably commit that won't result in punishment and just result in companies losing money (shoplifting, tort fraud, insurance fraud), but this is a community of gamers and collectors and we shouldn't condone or support conduct of that type.

Wow, get off your high horse. It's sad that you write off Nork for something so incredibly piddling considering his longstanding reputation as a community member and seller. To counteract your idiocy, I will never deal with you for anything. I don't want to get involved with someone who is such a holier-than-thou moron. Lord knows if I'm a day later than you expect shipping your item, you'll be calling me a thief faster than I can say hot coffee.

The good news is you have someone as saintly as yourself to buy from in the future to make up for it:


God I hate the term "victimless crime".

Not you again. You and bojay need to go have a law-abiding fuckfest somewhere else.


Sure, rising costs of development is one part of the puzzle. But I'm sure that each and every developer has a budget set aside just for lawyers and as cases like this mount, that budget will only increase. Who bears the cost of said increases, the end users. You can argue that it only cuts into the profits of the developer and on the surface, that's the immediate result. But it's naive to think that they are going to just laugh and write off the millions they lost due to this. It may not be made up on GTA IV, but it will be made up elsewhere. That elsewhere can only come from the end users, either in the form of increased prices directly or future product developed with a smaller budget. How can I be sure of this? Because the only way they make money is by selling product to gamers. That's the bottom line.

There is always a cost. Money doesn't just fall from the sky. I do agree with you that this is just another example of people whining until they get what they feel entitled to (re, the pussification of America). The whole lawsuit was pointless and a waste of resources as people that didn't like the content could just ignore it. Hell, they had to be an active participant utilizing illegal methods to even get to the content. But the costs of the defense as well as the costs of the settlement will eventually make it down to the end user. The more people that jump on the bandwagon, the more it costs everybody else.

I agree that the lawsuit in and of itself is so mindblowingly stupid that only Janet Jackson's tit can trump it.

However, I don't believe that such a large corporation such as Take Two would even flinch at a lawsuit like this after the assloads of dough they've made on everything GTA related, let alone all the other crap they publish. Because of that, I extremely highly doubt that it will ever be the primary factor for increasing costs of their future titles. They may cite it in press releases, but it will never be the sole or main reason.

The only reason anyone cares about this is the cost to the end user. We'll never see it. As it is, it took 20 years for a $50 NES game to turn into a $60 PS3 game (ignoring the $70+ SNES games...). Another price spike would be off the table. Odds on, developers and publishers will move costs and resources behind the scenes to make up for it.

And to prove that no one gives a shit beyond their own personal situation, has anything at all been done when a story surfaces about workers making these games working 80+ hour weeks for little pay? No. So is anyone going to care if these people get fired to make up for the lawsuit payout? Definitely not. They make a post on the internet, but when GTA5 comes out, you better watch the fuck out because they will run you the fuck over to get it regardless of how outraged they were months before.

[heybtbm]

Wow. Someone struck a nerve.

[portnoyd]

I fucking hate people who act like this. See also: that thread where porksta was being a total douche.

[Porksta]

Lol, after that post, I don't think you can call anyone a douche.

[98PaceCar]

I agree that the lawsuit in and of itself is so mindblowingly stupid that only Janet Jackson's tit can trump it.

However, I don't believe that such a large corporation such as Take Two would even flinch at a lawsuit like this after the assloads of dough they've made on everything GTA related, let alone all the other crap they publish. Because of that, I extremely highly doubt that it will ever be the primary factor for increasing costs of their future titles. They may cite it in press releases, but it will never be the sole or main reason.

The only reason anyone cares about this is the cost to the end user. We'll never see it. As it is, it took 20 years for a $50 NES game to turn into a $60 PS3 game (ignoring the $70+ SNES games...). Another price spike would be off the table. Odds on, developers and publishers will move costs and resources behind the scenes to make up for it.

And to prove that no one gives a shit beyond their own personal situation, has anything at all been done when a story surfaces about workers making these games working 80+ hour weeks for little pay? No. So is anyone going to care if these people get fired to make up for the lawsuit payout? Definitely not. They make a post on the internet, but when GTA5 comes out, you better watch the fuck out because they will run you the fuck over to get it regardless of how outraged they were months before.

I'm not sure that they would actually cite legal expenses as a reason for increasing the prices and honestly, I don't think they would try to push the prices any higher right now anyway. AS you said, it seems more likely that they would drop development budgets, at least on the non-triple A titles.

But I do think that the money lost is going to be taken somewhat personally by the people running the company/shareholders (if it's publically traded, I'm not sure of that). Even if it's just coming from a company on the surface, there are always people that are paid based on the performance of the company and lawsuits take away from their profit base. Like anybody else, they are going to do everything they can to protect that and/or increase it. It may not happen immediately and it may not be something that end users can actually see, but it'll be there.

[portnoyd]

Lol, after that post, I don't think you can call anyone a douche.

Douche.


But I do think that the money lost is going to be taken somewhat personally by the people running the company/shareholders (if it's publically traded, I'm not sure of that). Even if it's just coming from a company on the surface, there are always people that are paid based on the performance of the company and lawsuits take away from their profit base. Like anybody else, they are going to do everything they can to protect that and/or increase it. It may not happen immediately and it may not be something that end users can actually see, but it'll be there.

Point taken, but what I'm trying to get at is: will anyone (that being us, the gamers) really care even if it's there and we can't feel it? I will say an extreme no.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I'm offended by this entire thread.

Now where's my $33.74?

[unwinddesign]

A) To claim that such a crime is "victimless" is absolutely ludicrous. See exhibits B and C.

B) Frivolous litigation begets more litigation and so forth. Even if this doesn't result in settlements, this type of shit is a deadweight loss for society and results in a loss of time, money and energy that produces absolutely NOTHING of value for society. These resources could be better used elsewhere.

C) As an owner of Take Two's stock, this type of shit hurts shareholders. Also, the assertion that Take Two can afford this type of lawsuit because they make "assloads of dough" is hilariously incorrect.

Their net income has been negative for the past five quarters, and negative for the past four years, excluding fiscal year ending 10/31/08...which was the year GTA 4 came out. I don't think people realize how much Take Two is struggling, despite the fact that they make/publish some of the best games in the business.

D) Overall, in the grand scheme of things, is this relatively trivial? Certainly. Is this going to be the straw that breaks Take Two's back? Unequivocally, the answer is no.

However, does that mean we should we accept such lawsuits as a fact of life in the "pussified" society of the USA? I don't think so, either. I'm not passing judgment on the OP or anyone else involved in this thread.

If you were offended, then, as according to the law, you are entitled to your money. The real question here is not whether perjury was committed, or the severity of the lawsuit, but the precedent it sets, and what it does to the moral fiber of our society. Bit by bit, I see this litigation destroying our human capital -- innovation -- to engage in short sighted money grabs and blame games.

Those without vision are destroying the creative's ability to thrive and prosper. And that's what I think is really sad and disheartening about lawsuits such as this.

[portnoyd]

C) As an owner of Take Two's stock, this type of shit hurts shareholders. Also, the assertion that Take Two can afford this type of lawsuit because they make "assloads of dough" is hilariously incorrect.

I have to ask. Why are you a Take Two shareholder when:


Their net income has been negative for the past five quarters, and negative for the past four years, excluding fiscal year ending 10/31/08...which was the year GTA 4 came out. I don't think people realize how much Take Two is struggling, despite the fact that they make/publish some of the best games in the business.

[98PaceCar]

Point taken, but what I'm trying to get at is: will anyone (that being us, the gamers) really care even if it's there and we can't feel it? I will say an extreme no.

Ultimately, that is true. It's also very unfortunate that we allow lawsuits like this to happen as they will eventually lead to the decline of what we enjoy most. Not only in gaming, but in all aspects of our lives.

As dedicated gamers, we should be the ones beating the drum and saying that we do not agree with developers being sued due to content that others find offensive, unless we truly do find it offensive. We should have been the ones explaining to non-gamers just how difficult it is to access this content and that it wasn't an active part of the game like the media made it out to be. Each and every one of us is an ambassador to non-gamers and by either sitting idly by or worse, actively participating in lawsuits such as this, we're only hurting ourselves. It may not be totally apparent to us now or even in the near term, but there is impact.

[unwinddesign]

I have to ask. Why are you a Take Two shareholder when:

I'm not any more, so I should have said former shareholder. I purchased the stock in spring '08.

I was looking for a turn around play, since I knew they would be in the green with GTA 4. I didn't factor in that speculation was high when EA was going to buy them, so when unfortunately, that deal fell through, so the price dropped from like 26-27 to around 18-19. Everyone cooled on the stock, so when they finally released positive earnings (fueled by the then biggest entertainment launch ever) this was already factored in and the stock didn't bounce in any particular fashion. Then the financial crisis went into full swing and I got crushed further.

With a current market cap of ~900 million, I'd say the rights to the GTA franchise alone are probably worth that much, if you can acquire the development team with them, so it's probably not a bad deal at that price. Not to mention all their other franchises.

They just can't make money off all these great IPs because they delay the fuck out of every game they develop.

[/off topic]
[on topic]
Bottom line is, Take Two isn't a money generating machine; the GTA sales are deceiving as hell. It's because they give too much of a shit about quality (Carnival Games and 2K Baseball not withstanding). Ironically enough, Activision takes a completely different tactic and milks the fuck out of most of its games, and they make bank. Which is part of the reason our society should reexamine our core values and reward innovation a bit better. In my opinion, anyway...

[skaar]

I fucking hate people who act like this. See also: that thread where porksta was being a total douche.

Ah, you are of course referring to this one: http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=138366

Wherein I get my xbox banned for flashing the firmware on the hard drive and Porksta defends Nazi germany. That was a good one.

[Dangerboy]

And to think, 25 years ago we could have gotten settlement checks from Nintendo for leaving in a Minus World you couldn't escape even though you weren't supposed to be there anyway.

[portnoyd]

Ultimately, that is true. It's also very unfortunate that we allow lawsuits like this to happen as they will eventually lead to the decline of what we enjoy most. Not only in gaming, but in all aspects of our lives.

As dedicated gamers, we should be the ones beating the drum and saying that we do not agree with developers being sued due to content that others find offensive, unless we truly do find it offensive. We should have been the ones explaining to non-gamers just how difficult it is to access this content and that it wasn't an active part of the game like the media made it out to be. Each and every one of us is an ambassador to non-gamers and by either sitting idly by or worse, actively participating in lawsuits such as this, we're only hurting ourselves. It may not be totally apparent to us now or even in the near term, but there is impact.

Replace dedicated gamers with US citizens and developers with people/companies. Welcome to the US. It sucks and my god, do we need tort reform in the worst way. It's really, really sad that last winter, when the neighbors's kids came by to sled on my driveway, I had to go next door to their mother and make sure they knew that it wasn't 100% safe to do it with the septic ports in their path and if she could keep an eye out for them. In a sane world, I'd let them go nuts without any supervision. Let kids do what kids do and enjoy life before reality sets in. But in today's crazy landscape, they hurt themselves and this neighbor I don't know that well may sue me for unsafe conditions on the property that technically they were trespassing on.

AND THEY'D WIN.

Just to be clear, my point in previous posts is that while this lawsuit was completely out of our control (and completely out of control period), it's bullshit to fault Nork for taking advantage of it. The lawsuit was basically a lock well before anyone sent in their receipts. It's going to go down whether we like it or not. The choice is do you want $35 or not? Don't be angry someone is taking free cash.


I'm not any more, so I should have said former shareholder. I purchased the stock in spring '08.

Ah, gotcha.

[unwinddesign]

By not cashing the check, you're basically saying that you don't agree with the lawsuit. I see at as something of a vote.

If you cash it, you're one person that agreed that the content offended you and that the lawsuit was justified. You're casting a "vote" that you agree with this lawsuit, and this type of litigation as a whole.

[98PaceCar]

Replace dedicated gamers with US citizens and developers with people/companies. Welcome to the US. It sucks and my god, do we need tort reform in the worst way. It's really, really sad that last winter, when the neighbors's kids came by to sled on my driveway, I had to go next door to their mother and make sure they knew that it wasn't 100% safe to do it with the septic ports in their path and if she could keep an eye out for them. In a sane world, I'd let them go nuts without any supervision. Let kids do what kids do and enjoy life before reality sets in. But in today's crazy landscape, they hurt themselves and this neighbor I don't know that well may sue me for unsafe conditions on the property that technically they were trespassing on.

AND THEY'D WIN.

Just to be clear, my point in previous posts is that while this lawsuit was completely out of our control (and completely out of control period), it's bullshit to fault Nork for taking advantage of it. The lawsuit was basically a lock well before anyone sent in their receipts. It's going to go down whether we like it or not. The choice is do you want $35 or not? Don't be angry someone is taking free cash.

It certainly is a sad state of affairs and is only getting worse as time goes on.

I'm honestly not trying to attack Nork. I do think it's rather funny that he's claiming to have joined the suit due to being offended when it's clear he did it to get the money and not because he was actually offended. I can't say I didn't think about joining it myself. But for me, the money wasn't worth it when weighed against my conscience. For Nork, it clearly was. This is a case where I think he should have kept his head down, cashed the check, and gone on with life. At the very minimum, don't try to play it off that you were doing anything more than going for the money. I can at least respect someone for being honest about their intentions, even if I disagree with them.

Ninja edit: I would be careful with allowing a "me too" type of mentality in people. Nork may have been just a single person in a huge suit that was already a lock, but if you have enough single people involved, it gets bigger than intended in a hurry.

[portnoyd]

By not cashing the check, you're basically saying that you don't agree with the lawsuit. I see at as something of a vote.

If you cash it, you're one person that agreed that the content offended you and that the lawsuit was justified. You're casting a "vote" that you agree with this lawsuit, and this type of litigation as a whole.

Vote against something already decided or $35? I like free money. To each his own. After all I've seen in my short by comparison time, I've realized that my voice doesn't matter. However, $35 is $35.


I'm honestly not trying to attack Nork. I do think it's rather funny that he's claiming to have joined the suit due to being offended when it's clear he did it to get the money and not because he was actually offended.

Oh, most definitely not directing my last comment at you.

Nork probably shouldn't have played the "Of course I did/didn't!" route but it's no reason for someone else to say you'll never deal with him on these boards because of it.

[kupomogli]

Why has this went as far as did anyways?

God of War has nudity and sex mini games in both the first and second game. The original God of War came out only months after GTA San Andreas. Seeing as it's been this long and they're finally getting checks, I'm certain that the trial was delayed for quite some time and GoW was already out.

I mean seriously. GTA San Andreas needs to have a cheat device and a code. God of War you just need to start the game up and you pretty much can't miss it. Also, everyone is well aware of GTA that you can pick up hookers, etc, but God of War plays itself out to be an action adventure before people even bought it.

People are retarded.

[Kamille01]

lol. boy.

I was only gone for a few hours and it looks like someone has unleashed the hounds.

[YoshiM]

Why has this went as far as did anyways?

God of War has nudity and sex mini games in both the first and second game. The original God of War came out only months after GTA San Andreas. Seeing as it's been this long and they're finally getting checks, I'm certain that the trial was delayed for quite some time and GoW was already out.

I mean seriously. GTA San Andreas needs to have a cheat device and a code. God of War you just need to start the game up and you pretty much can't miss it. Also, everyone is well aware of GTA that you can pick up hookers, etc, but God of War plays itself out to be an action adventure before people even bought it.

People are retarded.

The difference is that (and please someone correct me if I'm wrong as I haven't played the GoW games) sex is implied but you don't see anyone bumping uglies (or in this case, polys?). You do QTE's for better performance and you hear stuff going on but that's that. Also the nudity, from what I've heard, is just topless and I *think* doesn't last all that long. You don't see anything "down south" on either the women or on Kratos himself.

With the "Hot Coffee" issue, the mini game allowed you to control CJ's groove and do virtual doll intercourse with full frontal nudity on the female (detailed to a certain degree-CJ left his jeans on) along with different positions. It's no longer implied, you're "doing it" and seeing it. Granted it probably ranks up there with what you see on late night Cinemax but in the minds of many people seeing it and then doing it are drastically different things.

[skaar]

It was almost like boinking a blue alien chick.

[Cryomancer]

I didn't sign up for it because I am not offended by virtual sex. Or real sex. Games (and for that matter, cinema) need to get over this hurdle eventually and have a realistic and usable "hey this has fucking in it don't sell it to kids" label. By realistic and usable I mean one that you could put a game out on and not have it completely unsellable anywhere (see AO, NC-17).

33 bucks isn't worth encouraging censorship.

[Garry Silljo]

Oh really? Let's take a quote from your post of January 2008 where you state the following:

Looks like the whole Hot Coffee thing is finally settled. People who bought the unpatched version of the game get up to $35 back if they still have original proof of purchase:

http://www.gtasettlement.com/

I still have my original receipts for the PS2 & Xbox versions of San Andreas but I don't know if I'm going to file a claim form. One of the requirements is that you must swear under penalty of perjury that you "were offended and upset by the ability of consumers to use third party software and/or hardware to alter the GTA:SA first edition disc to display the Hot Coffee content" and "Would not have bought the GTA:SA first edition disc had I known the content could be modified".

You didn't seem offended then. You even seemed to have some hesitation based on the fact that you had to swear to the statements under penalty of perjury. You went on to joke about the fact that you bought both the PS2 and Xbox versions of the game. Did you all of a sudden become offended or did you intend to commit perjury all along? Based on the evidence in the previous post, I am leaning toward the latter.

Any one else notice that Nork never replied to this post?

[mezrabad]

It's funny, but I remember being offended that the Hot Coffee content was left on the disc without being an element that could be unlocked legitimately from within the scope of the gameplay. It was a half-made feature that they didn't have the intestinal fortitude to either complete or remove and instead resorted to leaking word of it so that people could mod it and give them lots of "free publicity" -- about which I guess I'm feeling a bit of satisfaction that it wasn't that free.

Really, after GTA IV, if they make GTA V, I'll buy it (though, seriously, I want it to take place in Tokyo. Is that too much to ask? Yeah? Okay, you're probably right...). I just don't want to hear about them making adult stuff for a game and then -not- including it.

[SegaAges]

I stopped reading a bunch of this, but here you go:
You were offended by the hot coffee mod. You can't get GTA: Episodes of Liberty City since there is a full on sex scene in The Ballad of Gay Tony near the end.

There is also full frontal male nudity in The Lost and Damned.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but now you know, and now you are not allowed to buy it.

I have no clue why there is such a huge discussion over this in the thread about morals and douches. It is simple.

You were offended by the adult content in San Andreas, and I just informed you about the adult content in both episodes of Episodes of Liberty City, and hence, since you agreed under legal document, you are already offended by the content of Episodes, and you can't buy it.

I personally think it is awesome you got that money. Unfortunately, to get it, you had to sign legal documents stating you were offended, and had you been informed ahead of time, you would not have bought it.

Hahahaha, that kinda sucks that I just informed you ahead of time on Episodes, because now you can't buy it.

[deltoidsteep]

How has a situation arisen where you actually have to sign a legal document saying you were offended by something and you will continue to be offended by said thing for the rest of your life? Totally retarded. I would have gone for the money too.

[SegaAges]

How has a situation arisen where you actually have to sign a legal document saying you were offended by something and you will continue to be offended by said thing for the rest of your life? Totally retarded. I would have gone for the money too.

Regardless of how we feel, the truth of the matter is that the dude signed a legal document saying his mind is set a certain way when it comes to specific subjects.

I also warned him ahead of time that the new one that he wants to get is worse, so he would be going against his original statement that he made on a legal document in order to get the new one.

Yeah, it sucks that it had to end up that way, since it is a fun game. It does suck and I feel for you dude, but I do not think cashing that check and getting the new GTA is the wisest decision bro.

[deltoidsteep]

Regardless of how we feel, the truth of the matter is that the dude signed a legal document saying his mind is set a certain way when it comes to specific subjects.

I also warned him ahead of time that the new one that he wants to get is worse, so he would be going against his original statement that he made on a legal document in order to get the new one.

Yeah, it sucks that it had to end up that way, since it is a fun game. It does suck and I feel for you dude, but I do not think cashing that check and getting the new GTA is the wisest decision bro.

I do appreciate the situation, and i'm certainly not saying this is the case here, but people do change their minds about how they feel sometimes..Just seems silly to essentially sign legal papers saying that you'll never feel differently about something.

[kupomogli]

I do appreciate the situation, and i'm certainly not saying this is the case here, but people do change their minds about how they feel sometimes..Just seems silly to essentially sign legal papers saying that you'll never feel differently about something.

Not only did what he signed prior to the check being sent out had legal documentation that he feels offended, but the check itself came with documentation stating that if he cashed it that he felt offended about it. So you're trying to say he might have had a change of heart in the two whole days after he posted and now wants to see penis on his GTA?

[djbeatmongrel]

Not only did what he signed prior to the check being sent out had legal documentation that he feels offended, but the check itself came with documentation stating that if he cashed it that he felt offended about it. So you're trying to say he might have had a change of heart in the two whole days after he posted and now wants to see penis on his GTA?

What is wrong with seeing penis? It must be hard for you to take a shower unless you are some sort of never-nude like Tobias Funke. Admit it, you like wearing cut off jeans in the shower.

[MrRoboto19XX]

What is wrong with seeing penis? It must be hard for you to take a shower unless you are some sort of never-nude like Tobias Funke. Admit it, you like wearing cut off jeans in the shower.

Don't make fun of people like Kupomogli, there are dozens of them! Dozens!

[JSoup]

Regardless of how we feel, the truth of the matter is that the dude signed a legal document saying his mind is set a certain way when it comes to specific subjects.

And, as we all know, it is impossible for a persons views and ideals to change over time.

[deltoidsteep]

Not only did what he signed prior to the check being sent out had legal documentation that he feels offended, but the check itself came with documentation stating that if he cashed it that he felt offended about it. So you're trying to say he might have had a change of heart in the two whole days after he posted and now wants to see penis on his GTA?

No no, as I said, I doubt that's the case with this situation. I just mean in general, signing a legal paper to say you will feel this way about something forever is stupid idea. On the part of the signer, and of whoever thought up the document.

[kupomogli]

What is wrong with seeing penis? It must be hard for you to take a shower unless you are some sort of never-nude like Tobias Funke. Admit it, you like wearing cut off jeans in the shower.

There's nothing wrong with seeing your own penis. Nothing wrong with seeing it in straight porn also. I'm just saying he wants to see penis in his GTA and isn't offended by it but was offended by the San Andreas incident(which showed none.) He has two days to change his perspective? I personally would rather not see penis in my GTA, especially a gay sex scene, but I loved GTA4 so definitely going to pick the new one up once it is released for the PS3.

[portnoyd]

There's nothing wrong with seeing your own penis. Nothing wrong with penis in straight porn also. I'm just saying he wants to see penis in his GTA and isn't offended by it. I personally would rather not see penis in my GTA, especially a gay sex scene, but I loved GTA4 so definitely going to pick this one up.

You sure do love to say penis.

[djbeatmongrel]

There's nothing wrong with seeing your own penis. Nothing wrong with seeing it in straight porn also. I'm just saying he wants to see penis in his GTA and isn't offended by it but was offended by the San Andreas incident(which showed none.) He has two days to change his perspective? I personally would rather not see penis in my GTA, especially a gay sex scene, but I loved GTA4 so definitely going to pick the new one up once it is released for the PS3.

So seeing penis in gay porn is a no no?

[Cryomancer]

I'm all for dicks in videogames if it means someyear we can have tits and stuff too without bitching finally.

[Icarus Moonsight]

We used to play a game. It was based on social stigma, and beating the hell out of it. When in a public place, someone would start the game by whispering "penis", then the next person would up the volume a bit. This would continue in a round within the group and start again the next round with the first person. The game would continue like that until someone refused to go up to the next level. The others got to point at them and call them pretty much anything they wanted! "Bitch!" or "Little bitch!" was very popular. Yes, I've screamed "PENIS!" in public (using an Operatic sing-song style, usually FTW). And even kupo causes me pause. LOL

Don't worry about perjury. They can't prove it unless you admit to it. It's an asinine method to award a settlement anyway... Take the money and run. :p

[misfits859]

Everyone who has posted in this thread is a douche if you ask me. No kidding.

What a nice lawsuit to be a part of. Must be nice for the world to owe you something. Thanks for contributing to world stupidity.

[Cryomancer]

Everyone who has posted in this thread is a douche if you ask me. No kidding.

So anyone who has a contrary opinion the the topic, and also yourself? Just checkin.

[stargate]

Yes. As long as there's no Hot Coffee in Episodes, I have no problem with playing it. It's just San Andreas that offended me and I have every right to this settlement. Don't know why you have an issue with that.

I find this to be a load of BS. Are you trying to actually convince us that you were "offended"? Seriously? "Offended"?

norkusa, I am not going to judge you. It's not like you killed anyone. You told a small lie to get a few bucks, probably thinking it was no big deal. I am sure I have done worse.

But can you explain why you were offended? I mean, do you have children that saw the content? Is it against your religion? Are you a Jack Thompson supporter? Do simulated sex scenes involving no nudity really make you sick?

What irks me is that anyone who wanted too see this content would actually need to access it with a code. So unless you have children that got access to the game and used the code, then I call you a liar.

[kupomogli]

I think I got it.

These people might have been offended by the coffee and not the sex. Maybe there is no coffee in GTA Episodes From Liberty City. Or maybe they have something against hot coffee? Maybe moderately warm coffee would have been fine. Or nowdays they're serving cold coffee at some places. Maybe they just wanted a choice of which coffee they could pick instead of being forced to have their characters drink hot coffee before the pixelated porn. Or it could have been the sex, yeah.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Everyone who has posted in this thread is a douche if you ask me. No kidding.

Hey! We're douche-buddies! "penis"...

@douche-buddy Kupo: I'm highly offended by coffee... Decaf to be precise.

[JSoup]

Guy fakes being offended to get money.
Guy gets money.
People admit they understand this.
People start retarded argument that flies in the face of previous step.

What am I missing here?

[Bojay1997]

Guy fakes being offended to get money.
Guy gets money.
People admit they understand this.
People start retarded argument that flies in the face of previous step.

What am I missing here?

He didn't "fake" being offended. He signed a legally binding document under penalty of perjury claiming that he was offended when at the same time, he was posting on this site that he wasn't offended and was worried about submitting for the settlement because he knew it was perjury. I don't think there are too many people who agree with this guy and what he did. The fact that he then backtracked and claimed to have been offended all along was a straight up lie which he tried to get away with, not being bright enough to know that all of his posts from two years ago are searchable in mere seconds.

I would like to think that most people on this site are honest and truthful in their dealings. In fact, like most members of this community I count on it. When longtime members post about dishonest conduct of this type and a few other members act like it's no big deal, it makes me question how trusting I should be of other members of this site. I know the damage that lawsuit abuse can do and there is no justification for lying to collect money or lying to other members on this site. To me, it's no different than shoplifting or any other crime which involves fraud or dishonesty. I don't think it's an overreaction and I don't think the fact that you can and will get away with something makes it right.

[tom]

Why would you have the game without the Hot Coffee in it, that's the BEST BIT

[JSoup]

He didn't "fake" being offended. He signed a legally binding document under penalty of perjury claiming that he was offended when at the same time, he was posting on this site that he wasn't offended and was worried about submitting for the settlement because he knew it was perjury.

So....he faked being offended for money.

[tom]

Can I get $400 for this please?
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c173/thomasholzer/VCSX-MAN.jpg

[kupomogli]

I was offended by that pic. Only because I'm at work.

[emceelokey]

So it took 4 years for $35 to arrive?

[portnoyd]

He didn't "fake" being offended. He signed a legally binding document under penalty of perjury claiming that he was offended when at the same time, he was posting on this site that he wasn't offended and was worried about submitting for the settlement because he knew it was perjury. I don't think there are too many people who agree with this guy and what he did. The fact that he then backtracked and claimed to have been offended all along was a straight up lie which he tried to get away with, not being bright enough to know that all of his posts from two years ago are searchable in mere seconds.

I would like to think that most people on this site are honest and truthful in their dealings. In fact, like most members of this community I count on it. When longtime members post about dishonest conduct of this type and a few other members act like it's no big deal, it makes me question how trusting I should be of other members of this site. I know the damage that lawsuit abuse can do and there is no justification for lying to collect money or lying to other members on this site. To me, it's no different than shoplifting or any other crime which involves fraud or dishonesty. I don't think it's an overreaction and I don't think the fact that you can and will get away with something makes it right.

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1703207&postcount=24


Wow, get off your high horse. It's sad that you write off Nork for something so incredibly piddling considering his longstanding reputation as a community member and seller. To counteract your idiocy, I will never deal with you for anything. I don't want to get involved with someone who is such a holier-than-thou moron. Lord knows if I'm a day later than you expect shipping your item, you'll be calling me a thief faster than I can say hot coffee.

[tom]

I was offended by that pic. Only because I'm at work.

You should be working at work, not looking at nude pictures (unless you work for Penthouse magazine)