Hidden sexual mini-games in GTA: San Andreas

[zmweasel]

There's another topic about this, but it has a misleading title about the AO rating.

Here's the deal: there are several hump-your-girlfriend mini-games in the San Andreas program code. You don't see genitalia in this sequences, but you see everything else.

The mini-games were disabled before the game shipped and replaced with innocuous cut-scenes, but a clever hacker has created a patch to reactivate the mini-games in the PC version. People are freaking the hell out.

The ESRB is investigating the matter, as confirmed by Rockstar, which didn't actually 'fess up to the existence of the mini-games: "We feel confident that the investigation will uphold the original rating of the game, as the work of the mod community is beyond the scope of either publishers or the ESRB."

An MSNBC article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8515870/

Screenshots of the mini-games: http://www.gtagarage.com/mods/screens.php?id=28

Discuss, and by discuss, I mean laugh your ass off.

-- Z.

[Sothy]

Well since the game shouldnt havee been in the hands of any children in the first place whats the deal.

If a little kid has fifty bucks in his pocket to spend anyway the parents are obviously messing up right there.

[tylerwillis]

Wow. No really, wow. Even for GTA that's pushy.

Wouldn't Rockstar have realized that someone somewhere would find this bit of coding? Or did they perhaps secretly want someone to find it?

[YoshiM]

Sheesh, even if the game had those mini games intact would I really want to subject my on screen persona to lay the carpet with those scary looking individuals? The pic where the girl is saying "oh yeah, you're the man" looks like she took a huge whiff of Smile-X.

I was waiting for the gal to get all freakish like the "shy" girl Keisha from the movie "Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood" became when Loc Dog was drying to make his moves.

Keisha: (face turns all zombielike and wild)"C'mon bitch! Let's get it on!"

Loc Dog: (screams like a little girl and tries crawling away.)

[joshnickerson]

Meh. I figured this would happen eventually. I'm not fan of the GTA series in any way, but I know that each installment has pushed the barrier of what's acceptable further and further.

I can't blame Rockstar for this, since this data was never meant to be found and used, but at the same time they SHOULD have know someone was going to hack it out sooner or later.

[Gamereviewgod]

Even for GTA that's pushy.

Riiiight. Because blowing a cops head off doesn't push as hard. But my god, sex???

Come on, this isn't pushing anything. The game has already pushed.

[TheRedEye]

Well since the game shouldnt havee been in the hands of any children in the first place whats the deal.

If a little kid has fifty bucks in his pocket to spend anyway the parents are obviously messing up right there.

You're missing the point. This game was rated M for Mature, which is a guarantee that there is no blatant sexuality. What we're seeing here constitutes an "Adults Only" rating. Some parents may be okay with little Timmy hearing the word "fuck" and blowing cops away, but maybe they're not okay with pixelized boobs and actual sex, which is why the ratings exist.

Still, though, this whole thing is kind of dumb. The only way to access these hidden games is to make modifications that aren't endorsed by any of the companies involved. So what if the data is THERE, we can't see it by using the software in the way we agreed to in our invisible "contract" by purchasing the game. A good lawyer will be able to argue that this is no different than some kid making a nude patch for Tomb Raider.

[Mr.FoodMonster]

So its ok that BMX XXX and God of War both got M ratings, right?

BTW, on the M rated San Adreas already

"Strong Sexual Content"

So, by the way the ESRB rates things (I.E. 'Strong/Mild/Intense/Some'+'Violence/Sexual Content/Drug Use/Profanity'), it would only use a different word in place of 'Strong'. They arent going to put "Bare titties and fucking games" in there.

[Griking]

Well since the game shouldnt havee been in the hands of any children in the first place whats the deal.

Well, that's my arguement. The game isn't for children therefore there shouldn't be any arguements about it getting the AO rating that it deserves.


I can't blame Rockstar for this, since this data was never meant to be found and used

No, actually the code should never have been included in the game at all, hidden or not. it's 100% Rockstar's fault.

[TheRedEye]

So its ok that BMX XXX and God of War both got M ratings, right?

Did you miss the part where CJ stuck his dick into a woman on-camera? That's pornography, which is illegal to sell to a 17-year-old. M-rated games are 17+.

[slip81]

So its ok that BMX XXX and God of War both got M ratings, right?

Did you miss the part where CJ stuck his dick into a woman on-camera? That's pornography, which is illegal to sell to a 17-year-old. M-rated games are 17+.

I didn't see any genitals in any of those screens, at best it's just motions, and on par with something you'd see late night on Cinemax or Showtime or HBO.

Needless to say I'm gonna have to get the PC version and try this out LOL

Also did anyone else think that the ad for Vice City at the bottom of the article was a little humerous?

[tylerwillis]

Even for GTA that's pushy.

Riiiight. Because blowing a cops head off doesn't push as hard. But my god, sex???

Come on, this isn't pushing anything. The game has already pushed.

Yes, in a sense, the GTA are already pushy and this is nothing different.

My point was that GTA is known for its violence and crime-sprees - not for graphic sexual games. If this were Leisure Suit Larry, we probably all would have shrugged.

I do think it is pushy because - for better or worse - there is more stigma attached to sex than violence in America. It's much harder to get sexual type scenes for a particular movie rating than it is for violent type scenes. We've been taught that blowing someone away is something we expect to see in movies/games, but having sex is only for porn.

Whether that is right or wrong, I'm not arguing. I just say that Rockstar pushed it by going over the top and including sexual mini-games for a series that was already on the edge for its violent content.

[Jive3D]

This is all happening to drive sales of the game. It already exists on the PS2, and they can't speed up those sales. The Xbox version has also probably sold the majority of units that it will push. So the game is on two systems and they really need to get a few reasons out there for people to buy this third incarnation of the game.

I don't think that it's too far off for me to say that I'll bet that Rockstar communicated with that guy thet apparently wrote the patch. I'm sure that they arranged for this patch to be written and distributed by a party that has no 'known' connection to them. One of the programmers that worked on the game, could have EASILY told his buddy to write that patch. It's all just to create more buzz on the game. I have the PS2 version of the game, I hardly play it, so this isn't motivating me to buy the PC version, but it might get a few spikes in sales this week.

[Bronty-2]

I disagree. Too much risk of a lawsuit for it to be intentional.

[Sothy]

The Red Eye has spoken.

[Famidrive-16]

This reminds me of those old Naughty Dog games where you could 'unlock the girl' in the opening sequences...

I could see how people who freak out over this. I personally don't find it a big deal though.

[Aussie2B]

Sheesh, even if the game had those mini games intact would I really want to subject my on screen persona to lay the carpet with those scary looking individuals? The pic where the girl is saying "oh yeah, you're the man" looks like she took a huge whiff of Smile-X.

Tell me about it... Maybe it would be kind of hot... if the graphics didn't look like PS1 graphics, ugh!

I'd rather go watch me some PC-FX anime porn. At least that's competently drawn.

[Push Upstairs]

I didn't see any genitals in any of those screens, at best it's just motions, and on par with something you'd see late night on Cinemax or Showtime or HBO.

I'd agree. Since you don't see any actual penetration it falls under the classifcation "softcore".

And I'd hardly classify whats in those screenshots as "sex"....at most "dry humping".

[Gamereviewgod]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/gta4/news_6129301.html

Actual code on the disc, accesible with an Action Replay. Rockstar lied, and they are in DEEEP shit. Let the soccer mom battle begin.

[blissfulnoise]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/gta4/news_6129301.html

Actual code on the disc, accesible with an Action Replay. Rockstar lied, and they are in DEEEP shit. Let the soccer mom battle begin.

I wouldn't go so far as to say they're in "DEEEP shit". Take a look at the article:


Given that the minigame is about as raunchy as an episode of Sex and the City, cannot be accessed without entering a long string of cheat codes, and takes several hours of effort to access, charges that San Andreas is "pornographic" may seem extreme to some. However, its existence does appear to contradict Rockstar Games' carefully worded statement blaming hacker mischief for the existence of the Hot Coffee mod.

As long as no "no-nos" are seen interacting (thank you Hank Venture), I doubt a pornographic label can be slapped on the game, and it should maintain it's M rating (on par with God of War, BMX XXX, etc).

But I do agree this pushes the envelope about as far as it can go (at this point in time, anyway). And I applaud Rockstar for it. It's about time we had a real discussion regarding sex in video games. And we all know it's going to take a major publisher/title to start the dialog. Rockstar and the GTA series is the perfect launching pad.

And not to over state the obvious, but I, for one, think it's ridiculous that the discussion isn't over the rampant and grizzly violence that's already in the game, but about sexuality, the seemingly last taboo in videogames. Politicians have more or less given up the fight over one, it's only a matter of time before the fight is over on the other.

That all said, I'm a big fan of the GTA series, San Andreas included. None of this changes that.

[Gamereviewgod]

They already knew they were in trouble. The fact they lied opens up something else entirely, and it's about far more than sex in a mini-game. They're going after the ESRB, and with the code on the disc, certain people will hold them responsible.

Is it absurd? Damn right it is. Does it matter what we think? Sadly, no.

[Griking]

Here's (http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/15/senate.videogame.reut/index.html) another article about the shit that this is stirring.

This just may have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

[vintagegamecrazy]

IMO Rockstar deserves the worst, yes the ESRB is not strict enough, but the ESRB also had no way of telling that this would turn up. I don't play GTA for the violence and sleeze, I look at it from a moral side, I know sex is coming in video games too, I can see it, but Rockstar should get whacked for this all the same not the ESRB, they should also ban the sales to minors on these games.

[Mr.FoodMonster]

Why does R* "Deserve the worst"? You DO realize that this is NOT a good thing for any modern gamer in any possible way you look at it? This may cause FEDERAL RATINGS to be made. And, the M rating is basically the same as BANNING ALL SALES TO MINORS. So what, theres REAL porn out there, should you blame the creators for 14 year olds looking at it, or their parents? You're kind of a moron.

[zmweasel]

They already knew they were in trouble. The fact they lied opens up something else entirely, and it's about far more than sex in a mini-game. They're going after the ESRB, and with the code on the disc, certain people will hold them responsible.

I'm very interested to see how long Rockstar sticks to its lie. The Reuters article linked above says:

"The 'hot coffee' modification, which violates the game's software user agreement, is the result of hackers disassembling and then combining, recompiling and altering the game's source code, Rockstar said."

It's true that messing with the code violates the user agreement, but the source-code stuff is doublespeak bullshit, as proven by the PS2 Action Replay code. All the hackers are doing is disabling the snippet(s) of code that tells the game to skip the sex.

Questions to which we'll never get answers: Who, uh, conceived of the sex mini-game? How far into development did Rockstar come to its senses and decide to disable it? Why wasn't that portion of the code removed, not just disabled? (Possibly 'cause the decision came so late in the dev-cycle that to remove code would've risked introducing bugs?)

EDIT: Game developer/blogger Greg Costikyan (http://www.costik.com/weblog/) says it can only be one of two scenarios: a rogue programmer (like the guy who created SimCopter's infamous gay parade), or a plan by R* to reveal the sex mini-game down the road.

-- Z.

[Gamereviewgod]

Here's what doesn't make much sense. I don't believe any PR person is stupid enough to say it wasn't their fault without knowing about it. No one is that dumb knowing the backlash. The other thing that doesn't add up is why it took so damned long to fine. I understand the PC version would be easier to get into, but it's been over a year. Something like the Tiger Woods South Park debacle was found in a matter of a few weeks.

Those two things just don't add up to this being in Rockstars court. Taking the mini-game out would likely glitch the hell out of things, especially game with so much going on like GTA. Could it not be possible it was submitted to the ESRB and given a AO, then they blocked it and resubmitted?

As always, my epic, 1700+ word piece on the subject is available on my blog. ;)

[vintagegamecrazy]

Why does R* "Deserve the worst"? You DO realize that this is NOT a good thing for any modern gamer in any possible way you look at it? This may cause FEDERAL RATINGS to be made. And, the M rating is basically the same as BANNING ALL SALES TO MINORS. So what, theres REAL porn out there, should you blame the creators for 14 year olds looking at it, or their parents? You're kind of a moron.


I see that you like to start flame wars, go ahead, Rockstar still deserves what they get handed to them. Gamespot stated it, Gameshark doesn't add code only change it, so why did R* lie, the government is really going to hand it back to them if they find them guilty.

[zmweasel]

I see that you like to start flame wars, go ahead, Rockstar still deserves what they get handed to them. Gamespot stated it, Gameshark doesn't add code only change it, so why did R* lie, the government is really going to hand it back to them if they find them guilty.

"The government"--that is, the Senate nimrods who've hated video games ever since Nintendo's claim to a Washington TV station that Sega's "Night Trap" was a sign of the Apocalypse--won't just "hand it" to Rockstar (although there's no official investigation beyond the ESRB's at this time; Hillary Clinton wants the FTC to get involved, but that hasn't happened yet).

The nimrods will try to use this incident to to prove the impotence of the ESRB, and place video game ratings under governmental control. That is unquestionably the worst-case scenario. That's Nintendo censoring third-part content in the NES era, only ten kajillion times worse. And that's why Rockstar's lie is so very, very foolish. The repercussions of this mini-game, and this lie, could adversely affect the entire video game industry.

-- Z.

[Mayhem]

The daft thing is, that all this is just a flash in the pan here in the UK. Sex in games? Far better than a load of random violence (the same applies to our TV as well).

And Americans call us prudish about sex ;)

(apart from the fact that British men apparently last longer than any other country in the world hee hee)

Which is probably why Rockstar had the idea for the minigame in the first place. And then thought about the global implications down the line and disabled it. There was snippets of info about the possibility of having it in the game, I guess they just never removed the code, but disabled it.

[josekortez]

Anybody have the Gameshark or Action replay codes to unlock this on the NTSC version of GTA: San Andreas PS2? I haven't bought the game, but I might now...

[Jive3D]

This will definately increase sales for the gameshark. I am considering the purchase now.

I'm sure that there have been a multitude of things like this included in games. Yes, this instance is mildy graphic - and honestly I still think that it would fit the rating given to the game. But the fact still remains that this content was not meant to be accessible to the consumer! Rockstar likes to be slippery - but they are telling the truth, albeit by the skin of their teeth.

[IntvGene]

I dunno... I still see how people are going to be mad because this game has been mislabelled by the ESRB (not necessarily their fault). I'm almost positivie that this game would have been AO if the content was kept in.

The average parent may be okay with some violence, but I don't know many that would willingly buy a game that had sexual mini-games in it. Now, if they come home and see their kid playing the sexual mini-games in a game that supposedly didn't have them, you gotta be crazy if they aren't going to be blaming Rockstar and/or the ESRB.

I don't know what the hell Rockstar was thinking here. Maybe publicity? But, the lies and the omissions of wrongdoing.. I don't get it. This does nothing good for the gaming industry, but give it another black eye. It's not the content, but it's th whole way that this has been handled. And, this isn't just Nude Raider, having Samus appear nude or anything, I think that there is quite a difference here.

[thegreatescape]

Hmmmmm, looks like this will mean GTA:SA gets its rating revoked in Australia and consequently the game will be banned. The OFLC do NOT take sex in games lightly; infact its pretty much prohibited.

link (http://www.sumea.com.au/snews.asp?news=1581&related=Industry)

[slip81]

I can't understand what the big deal about these minigames are. Why do people have such a problem with sex.

San Andreas allows you to commit graphic acts of violence, and every other word of dialogue is "fuck", but yet the game only recieved the normal amount of controversy when released. Now we learn that through multiple codes and hours of work you can have simulated dry humping, and people are having fits.

Anyone can see content just as "bad" if not worse in any R rated movie and even some cable television. These people complaining need to either get their heads out of their asses and realize how stupid their argument is, or be consistent and complain about sex in every form of media.

There are graphic sex scenes in the following movies

Terminator
American History X
Swordfish
Irreversible
Straw Dogs

And countless others, yet I've never seen or heard of a movie with sex getting as much negative press as SA seems to be getting, I mean the local news program out here in Providence Rhode Island had a story on it the other night.

EDIT: Also any kid can walk into a comic or magazine shop and have a 99% chance of being allowed to purchase a copy of Heavy Metal magazine (a publication ripe with graphic sex and nudity), but no one seems to care, and that mags been around over 20 years.

[Yamazaki]

Good lord! We live in a world were banging a woman counts heavier than slaying a thousand people!!

[ianoid]

I definitely don't get the hubbub. The game is being sold with this stuff DISABLED. This isn't a feature of the released game. Just because a patch or modification can get to these 'minigames' (Is it like X-man (the non-maze part)?), doesn't mean it's a part of the regular games.

This is clearly a Led Zepplin record being played backwards.

Informed kiddies getting to these patches (and what 14 yo (or 34 yo for that matter) wouldn't want to check out some low grade pop-culture porn) likely have plenty of access to this naughty stuff on the internet, where they got the info from in the first place.

This is out of hand. If someone released a patch to create a naughty scene in any game (which is perfectly conceivable), would the original company be liable? If someone hacks away at GTA:SA and finds some code to exploit, I still don't think the company should be liable. Let's also get rid of all web browsers, because if you type in some naughty websites you can see porn. Ooooh. Sex. Ban it!

Hilary, mind your own business. Like running for president or something stupid like that.

[jajaja]

Good lord! We live in a world were banging a woman counts heavier than slaying a thousand people!!

Agreed, its madness. This is a typical USA syndrome tho. Just look at the Janet Jackson boob stunt.

[Gamereviewgod]

The sad thing is, had certain people shut up about it, a lot of kids wouldn't even know about it.

And GTA is already labeled for strong sexual content. It's on the box. A parent can still it's in the game.

[zmweasel]

I can't understand what the big deal about these minigames are. Why do people have such a problem with sex.

Not "people." Just Americans. And we're very hypocritical about it, as well. An article in the L.A. Times about the runaway sales success of "unrated" DVD versions of PG-13 and R-rated movies put it this way:

"This trend speaks volumes about the tendency in America to say one thing but do another. People claim they want wholesome family entertainment, but the big money on the Internet and in pay TV comes from pornography. In the rare instances when a studio puts out a feel-good valentine, like Because of Winn-Dixie or My Dog Skip, the movie dies on the vine. For all the talk of our country's obsession with moral values, nothing succeeds with the American people like the salacious promise of a little extra nudity or hanky-panky in their DVD packages."

Clueless politicians (and all too many parents) also believe that, nearly 30 years after the Atari 2600 was introduced, videogames are "just for kids."


Also any kid can walk into a comic or magazine shop and have a 99% chance of being allowed to purchase a copy of Heavy Metal magazine (a publication ripe with graphic sex and nudity), but no one seems to care, and that mags been around over 20 years.

Are you familiar with comic-book history? (I wouldn't actually consider Heavy Metal a comic, but you mention comic-book shops, so...) The "Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency" conducted an investigation of the evil comic-book industry in the spring of 1954. That incident spawned the Comics Code, just as the 1993 Senate hearings on Night Trap and Mortal Kombat spawned the ESRB.

Detailed info (and a sense of deja vu) at: http://www.crimeboss.com/history03-1.html

Times change, but politicians remain rock-stupid.

-- Z.

[Gamereviewgod]

Didn't they also go after Dungeons and Dragons, or did it stay inside concerned parent circles? Can't forget rap and heavy metal music too. It's amazing we're all still here after listening to it.

[zmweasel]

Didn't they also go after Dungeons and Dragons, or did it stay inside concerned parent circles? Can't forget rap and heavy metal music too. It's amazing we're all still here after listening to it.

Indeed! Who could forget the evils of "the rock and the roll"? Elvis's pelvis put this country on the road to ruin.

-- Z.

[SoulBlazer]

Okay, part of this is Rockstar's fault. There may have been a very good reason for leaving the mini game in the game and not removing it (introducing bugs and what not), but they should have KNOWN that SOMEONE would find it at some point. Which really makes me believe they decided "well, we'll just leave it in there, it's good publicity, blah blah blah".

Only I don't think they expected it to blow up in their faces.

But I feel some of this is the fault of the ESRB also. Zach mentioned eariler how the government may use this as a basis for attacking the ESRB and the poor job they do. And I feel the ESRB DOES do a poor job. They could do SO much better. Having their own people to PLAY games would be a step in the right direction. Having a programer from the game come in and go over it with them is another.

No, we don't need the government involved in regulating games. The stores can do that on their own -- don't sell M rated games to kids, card people, etc. Publishers can also be more honest about their games and the content.

But it may take the government THREATING action to force publishers and stores to DO these things. Just like when the ratings were created over 10 years ago. I almost wish something DOES happen in Congress, that will force the ESRB and the publishers to say 'listen, this rating code and how we are selling games is not working. We need to do something or we're all in deep shit'. Get stores to enforce ratings, change the rating code and add more information to make it less confusing to parents, have the ESRB do a bigger role in checking out games, and lunch a HUGE campaign that MANY games are for ADULTS and ADULTS ONLY -- something it seems, as Zach said, that many people just don't know yet.

None of that will prevent something like this GTA mini game fiasco in happening again for SURE, but it will reduce the chances of it happening again.

Now is the time for everyone to work together and improve the industry. Failue to act now will just cause this to happen again in the future, with even worse conquenses.

And yes, I agree with the posters that Americans are too uptight about sex. I don't see the big deal in this myself anwyay. Part of it is due to the 'innocent' game image many folks still have. But we need to stop being so Purtian about these things. A kid can get all of this and MORE just from a quick Google search. :roll:

[lendelin]

Times change, but politicians remain rock-stupid.

-- Z.

A agree completely with everything you said, and with all the criticism in the posts about the hypocrital and non-sensical statements of the Liebermans, Kohls, Walshs, Andersons, and Clintons;

...BUT I don't think politicians remain rock-stupid. On the contrary. They are vote-hunters, they are primarily interested in re-election, and that means they keep nonsense alive because it can be sold to voters AND shows (in their perception) positive results in elections. This is something that really concerns me. This is the real problem, and I'm unsure about the outcome of the GTA- sexual mini-game.

The misconception about games in the "broad public" in particular among non-gamers isn't far from over. This little, in my opinion harmless mini-game in GTA for all the reasons stated will unfortunately become THE representation of videogames today for political propagandists.

The babble goes on for over fifteen years now. Nothing changed despite results of empirical research which clearly shows that games are NOT "harmful" for "our children." The same dumb babble of the representative of the parents group during the Senate Hearings of 1993 was recently repeated in all its non-sense during the discussion about the new bill in Illinois. The Governor quoted in USA Today a "concerned" parent that we "have to fight against the corruption of the souls and minds of our children." Pure babble, no beef.

Violence and "sexual content" in games is an issue most profitable for politicians becasue the sentiment is out there in the public. It is a sure-fire issue like smoking and being against crime. The legislation process in Illinois demonstrated how much pressure representatives experience to vote for bills like that despite better insight.

Hilary Clinton jumps on the game-bandwagon like on so many others before for the sake of the track record as a presidential candidate. It is political correctness par excellence.

What is the real danger? The myth and misconception about "harmful" videogames is a cross-cutting issue going through extreme liberals and extreme conservatives alike and reached moderates for some time; and the relaxed moderate center doesn't really care. This might be a set-up in which hysterical and dumb notions make it into legislation. It wouldn't be the first time, and certainly not the last time.

I'm aware that there are a LOT of obstacles to prevent dumb and severe legislation (the most important one is the tremendous economic importance of the game industry today); but this ongoing non-sense for over a decade now makes me "concerned."

Politicans learned and are very skillful to keep nonsense alive for their own profit; when a couple of things come together, unfortunately nonsense can make it into legislation.

I don't know what the best strategy against this kind of political propaganda is. Fortunately we have professional lobbyists in Washington for the game industry now, certainly the game industry speaks with one voice now, and the ESRB ratings gave game developers more freedom for game content; all of the above is the direct result of the '93 Senate hearings.

But is this enough? So far widely to ignore the anti-game hysteria worked. The industry became bigger and more important than ever before without an agressive counter- PR. But at one point, I'm afraid, taking the long-lasting and repeated non-sense heads-on might be unavoidable despite positive developments: Henry Jenkins, the acceptance of games as an entertainment form, in general positive shows on PBS, G4TV and many others aren't enough.

The public is still divided over games, and the discussion is far from over. The hypocritical attitude of smart politicians for their own gain reflects it.

[Gamereviewgod]

Get stores to enforce ratings, change the rating code and add more information to make it less confusing to parents, have the ESRB do a bigger role in checking out games, and lunch a HUGE campaign that MANY games are for ADULTS and ADULTS ONLY -- something it seems, as Zach said, that many people just don't know yet.

How much more do you want? They already include deep descriptors on the back, including Strong Sexual Content in GTA. Seems proper to me. They have fliers in every store. They take out ads in magazines. They play videos on kiosks. there's a bold letter in the same place on every game.

Short of putting a giant neon sign in every game department in America pointing to the games kids should be playing, it won't make a difference. If a parent hasn't figured this out by now, they won't. The ones who care always will. The ones who won't never will.

If anything, if the government wants to be involved, they should be supporting the ESRB, not ripping it.

[Griking]

How much more do you want? They already include deep descriptors on the back, including Strong Sexual Content in GTA. Seems proper to me. They have fliers in every store. They take out ads in magazines. They play videos on kiosks. there's a bold letter in the same place on every game.

Short of putting a giant neon sign in every game department in America pointing to the games kids should be playing, it won't make a difference. If a parent hasn't figured this out by now, they won't. The ones who care always will. The ones who won't never will.

Unfortunately the times are changing and there are many many shitty parents ouyt there that have absolutely no care or clue what their kids are viewing.

It seems like all of the existing signs and flyers that you mention were meant to be strong hints to parents that perhaps they should pay better attention. Unfortunately it didn't work as it appears that neither the parents or game stores have a problem with letting young children play games that let them take part in extremely violent situations. So yeah, now the government may step in and involve themselves in parenting our children. Again mind you. they've already been doing this when it comes to movies, magazines, drinking, driving, etc...

Oh, our evil government. They're taking away my rights as a parent to let my child watch someone get decapitated. They're evil I tell you. I have a solution, try moving to Iraq. From what I read in the news they don't seem to have as big of a problem with audiences watching decapitations there.

[zmweasel]

I just don't see the big problem with the government creating and enforcing ratings on videogames for children. There are already current laws restricting what children can see and do from driving to drinking to what movies they're supposed to be able to view to what magazines they can purchase. Why are videogames with extreme violence and now sex so different?

The government would be creating and enforcing ratings for ALL games, not just the ones "for children"--and in the minds of most idiotic Senators, ALL video games are for children. I'd feel (very slightly less) uneasy if Lieberman, Clinton, Yee, or any of the other assholes would acknowledge that adults play video games, too.

-- Z.

[Push Upstairs]

I, again, don't really see where the problem is here.

Its an M rated game that states "strong sexual content". Its not like people weren't given some type of warning (even if the games in question were disabled).


This is shit as overblown as the Janet boob incident....which took me like 2 minutes to get over that.

[Griking]

I just don't see the big problem with the government creating and enforcing ratings on videogames for children. There are already current laws restricting what children can see and do from driving to drinking to what movies they're supposed to be able to view to what magazines they can purchase. Why are videogames with extreme violence and now sex so different?

The government would be creating and enforcing ratings for ALL games, not just the ones "for children"--and in the minds of most idiotic Senators, ALL video games are for children. I'd feel (very slightly less) uneasy if Lieberman, Clinton, Yee, or any of the other assholes would acknowledge that adults play video games, too.

-- Z.

As a grown adult is there really that much out there right now that you aren't allowed to view by law that you feel that you're missing out on? Do you really think that the government will suddenly say that they won't allow anybody, including grown adults to play a violent videogame? I don't think so. This is all about children and not adults and because of that I have absolutely no worry about it at all.

Now will the industry possibly shy away from making violent videogames because children won't be allowed to purchase them. Probably but if you listen to what the industry says they were never intending for children to be playing the violent games in the first place. :roll:

[zmweasel]

As a grown adult is there really that much out there right now that you aren't allowed to view by law that you feel that you're missing out on?

Fortunately, no. However, our Republican-controlled government is trying to seize control of cable television, which would certainly have a censorious and negative impact on my personal entertainment choices.


Do you really think that the government will suddenly say that they won't allow anybody, including grown adults to play a violent videogame? I don't think so.

I absolutely believe that the current faith-based Republican administration would have no problem with banning certain videogames from being released, under the guise of "protecting the children." I don't want Dubya and his minions involved in any aspect of my personal entertainment choices.


Now will the industry possibly shy away from making violent videogames because children won't be allowed to purchase them. Probably but if you listen to what the industry says they were never intending for children to be playing the violent games in the first place. :roll:

The industry will shy away from developing mature-themed videogames because the government will use its limitless power to punish them for doing so. Nintendo's censorship of third-party NES game content was one thing; government regulations are quite another.

-- Z.

[Gamereviewgod]

The industry will shy away from developing mature-themed videogames because the government will use its limitless power to punish them for doing so. Nintendo's censorship of third-party NES game content was one thing; government regulations are quite another.

Ding! Once the retailers start being fined, and idiotic, careless employees sell them to kids, stores stop stocking them. That's indeirect censorship, but it's still censorship.

[Mayhem]

However a vast proportion of sales go to people who are the legal age and who then either let or give the game to those underage. That's where the focus needs to be. Tightening up of sales prevention to minors is already in place, it's making the buyers more responsible that needs to happen.

[Wavelflack]

"apart from the fact that British men apparently last longer than any other country in the world hee hee"


That's likely a consequence of looking at a British woman during sexual activity.

[Wavelflack]

re: indirect censorship

Would you argue that a firearms dealer being fined over the sale of weapons to minors, or to felons, is being indirectly denied 2nd amendment rights? What about being fined to the point of going ou of business?

Or perhaps we could use a liquor store owner, busted repeatedly for selling to underage customers. Is he indirectly being denied 21st amendment rights via fines?

I'm a strong proponent of responsibility. If stores can't manage to find employees that will fulfill their responsibilities for age verification, then the company is responsible for whatever woes befall them as a resulting consequence.

[SoulBlazer]

In response to what someone said to my eariler posting, it seems the ESRB and retailers are not doing ENOUGH. If they can come up with a new gameplan, and have their lobbyists in Washington push hard enough, even if it's not very MUCH, this whole thing should blow over eventuly, like it did with Night Trap et all.

I see the ESRB as being a group of people without any real power behind their work, and a group that has no teeth is not going to be effective with their stateds goals -- to keep violent and mature games out of the hands of kids and educate parents.

Really, I agree that this whole thing is stupid and parents need to take responsbility, but if they don't, SOMEONE has to. I'd MUCH rather have the stores and publishers accept this fact and work on it then the government getting in. x_x

How long would it take to revise the rating sysem to make it more informtive, start enforcing it by fining stores that sell M rated games to kids, and slap a fine on Rockstar for what they did? Show that 'fait accompli' to Congress and they will grumble and go off to the next big issue.

Waveflack is right. The stores need to do more. The ESRB needs to do more. Publishers need to do more. If each of these groups does a little bit better in how they are selling games, then things can only get better. Time will help video games become more accepted in society like it did with movies, TV, and rock music.

Maybe we can even see MORE adult games come out of the market now, with less fear they will end up in the hands of kids. :P I'd LOVE to see more AO games, myself......

[Gamereviewgod]

Would you argue that a firearms dealer being fined over the sale of weapons to minors, or to felons, is being indirectly denied 2nd amendment rights?... Or perhaps we could use a liquor store owner, busted repeatedly for selling to underage customers...

Selling a gun to a 12-year year old could have someone killed. Selling them alcohol is detrimental to their health. Completely different. We're talking about an entertainment medium.


Really, I agree that this whole thing is stupid and parents need to take responsbility, but if they don't, SOMEONE has to.

No, for the love of god, people need to take responsibility for THEMSELVES. We need to stop maikng excuses for peoples actions. If a kid has a video game he shouldn't have, it's no ones fault but the parents. We need to fix where the problems start: in the home.

Will kids get things past the best parents? Of course. However, those parents, the truly great ones, are the ones who have already instilled the neccesary values in their children. The other parents simply don't care. Fining a retailer doesn't change anything. Those parents still don't care.

With all of this controversy on nightly news and in the general media, if a parent STILL doesn't know about the ESRB, then nothing will change that.

The ESRB can't become any more inofromative. What else could they possibly add to their ratings?

[slip81]

The industry will shy away from developing mature-themed videogames because the government will use its limitless power to punish them for doing so. Nintendo's censorship of third-party NES game content was one thing; government regulations are quite another.

Ding! Once the retailers start being fined, and idiotic, careless employees sell them to kids, stores stop stocking them. That's indeirect censorship, but it's still censorship.

I doubt a situation like this would arouse. I'm sure a store manager would much sooner fire an irresponsible worker and hire someone who would enforce the ratings, rather than decide not to carry the latest GTA game and loose all that profit money.

[Teo]

This thread had kind of a novelty to once but now I cannot bring myself to read, the words just go blurry when I try and focus in. Don't mind me.

[Wavelflack]

Would you argue that a firearms dealer being fined over the sale of weapons to minors, or to felons, is being indirectly denied 2nd amendment rights?... Or perhaps we could use a liquor store owner, busted repeatedly for selling to underage customers...

Selling a gun to a 12-year year old could have someone killed. Selling them alcohol is detrimental to their health. Completely different. We're talking about an entertainment medium.


Really, I agree that this whole thing is stupid and parents need to take responsbility, but if they don't, SOMEONE has to.

No, for the love of god, people need to take responsibility for THEMSELVES. We need to stop maikng excuses for peoples actions. If a kid has a video game he shouldn't have, it's no ones fault but the parents. We need to fix where the problems start: in the home.

Will kids get things past the best parents? Of course. However, those parents, the truly great ones, are the ones who have already instilled the neccesary values in their children. The other parents simply don't care. Fining a retailer doesn't change anything. Those parents still don't care.

With all of this controversy on nightly news and in the general media, if a parent STILL doesn't know about the ESRB, then nothing will change that.

The ESRB can't become any more inofromative. What else could they possibly add to their ratings?

Selling a gun to anyone can result in someone being killed. Alcohol is detrimental to everyone's health. Those are not the reasons for the age limiting laws and ordinances. They are in place to restrict the access of immature, irresponsible individuals (as defined by law) to materials which they may not be able to use with judgement and responsibility. The public at large has decided that it wants underage people to have restricted access to materials and media that may prove harmful. If ESRB enforcement becomes law, then it is law.

I know there is the eternal argument about the fictional 12 year old kid who has shown better judgement than the 27 year old man, but it can't be helped. I'm perfectly interested in applying a battery of tests to each and every individual so as to determine their personal fitness to own weapons, view violent and provocative imagery, consume alcohol and drugs, have children, vote, or any number of things which (when placed in the wrong hands) has a detrimental effect on society. Obviously this is an unrealistic expectation, justified as it may be. The practical solution then is to try to get a feel for where the terminator between the irresponsible and responsible lives exist.

This is all beside the point anyway. The fact remains that it's generally agreed that parents should be responsible for their children's lives. As such, a parent who feels comfortable presenting their child with GTA3, or whatever, may purchase the game themselves. This would violate nothing. The employee may sell the game to an adult.

So why would anyone argue that the ESRB not be enforced? It doesn't prevent parents from making the decisions concerning the things their children view. It does prevent children with irresponsible parents from bypassing by default the parental check.

[Gamereviewgod]

I doubt a situation like this would arouse. I'm sure a store manager would much sooner fire an irresponsible worker and hire someone who would enforce the ratings, rather than decide not to carry the latest GTA game and loose all that profit money.

So in a company as big as Wal Mart begins getting hit with fines on a daily basis, at a few grand a pop, parents and politcians come at them for being irresponsible, they're not going to say "screw it?" Or, even ask for censored versions? New employees come in everyday. They're even more likely to make a mistake, As the old ones are fired, the new ones keep screwing up. It shouldn't happen, but it's a very easy to see scenario.


So why would anyone argue that the ESRB not be enforced? It doesn't prevent parents from making the decisions concerning the things their children view. It does prevent children with irresponsible parents from bypassing by default the parental check.

Because the ESRB is a guideline for parents. That was its purpose, and for a while there, politicans seemed happy. Now they're back because the system they supported is now flawed. Bull. If parents were properly parenting in this country, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. We're making excuses for them.


The public at large has decided that it wants underage people to have restricted access to materials and media that may prove harmful.

That's what happens when the media they read and watch makes one single game a scapegoat.

[ianoid]

Ammunation will sell a gun to anyone in Liberty City. Irresponsible!

[Griking]

Ding! Once the retailers start being fined, and idiotic, careless employees sell them to kids, stores stop stocking them. That's indeirect censorship, but it's still censorship.

That's hardly censorship, it's simply an option that a company has (and a dumb one) if they feel that they can't operate under the guidelines of the law. All a retailer has to do to avoid being fined is take some resposibility and train their employees. Sure there will be a learning period in the beginning where I'm sure a lot of stores will be fined. But like any other job if an employee is unable to perform their duties to an expected level they'll no doubt loose their job and be replaced bypeople who can.

How many convienance stores do you know of that have stopped carrying cigarettes since the government starting fining stores that sell cigarettes to minors?

How many packages stores can you name that have closed down strictly because they felt that they couldn't keep their employees from selling alcohol to minors?

Game stores will continue selling games as they've always have. They're just going to have to start assuming some responsibilities that they've been ignoring up to this point.

Besides, nobody has responsed to the fact that the developer's are claiming that these games aren't supposed to be for children. Well if that's the case then there shouldn't be any losses if selling them to children suddenly becomes illegal



Selling a gun to a 12-year year old could have someone killed. Selling them alcohol is detrimental to their health. Completely different. We're talking about an entertainment medium.

How about pornography, that's technically considered entertainment. Should we allow the sales of Hustler magazine to 10 year old children as well?


No, for the love of god, people need to take responsibility for THEMSELVES. We need to stop maikng excuses for peoples actions. If a kid has a video game he shouldn't have, it's no ones fault but the parents. We need to fix where the problems start: in the home.

Would you suggest that the government start fining parents then instead of the retailers?

The current system is clearly not working. What would you suggest that will actually work at getting violent games out of the hands of children. Don't give perfect world scenerios, give me real world scenerios, something that will work better than the government's plan.

The primary problem as I see it is that too many people are just plain lousy parents but unfortunately you can't require that a person have to pass an intelligence test before they are allowed to give birth.

[Gamereviewgod]

How many convienance stores do you know of that have stopped carrying cigarettes since the government starting fining stores that sell cigarettes to minors?

How many packages stores can you name that have closed down strictly because they felt that they couldn't keep their employees from selling alcohol to minors?

None. However, it's common sense that kids aren't meant to have them. You can ask a 10 year old that.


How about pornography, that's technically considered entertainment. Should we allow the sales of Hustler magazine to 10 year old children as well?

A different kind of entertainment. We're in a country where nudity isn't accepted in any form. Look at Europe. They're far more open. I'd be interested in what sort of laws they have there.

And yes, I know that's dodgiing the question. I honestly don't have an answer. All I can say is that Hustler is real. Games are not.


Would you suggest that the government start fining parents then instead of the retailers?

The current system is clearly not working. What would you suggest that will actually work at getting violent games out of the hands of children. Don't give perfect world scenerios, give me something that will work better than the government's plan.

I would love to see parents take some of the blame. Should they be fined for just letting their kids play? No, each parent should know what's appropriate. If the kid pulls something stupid, then yes.

The real question is WHY the current system doesn't work. The movie rating system must work because there's no debate about it. The ESRB is far deeper.

And it's not a perfect worl scenario. If you have a kid, you're taking on that responsibility. Nothing more, nothing less. It's like saying if you own a gun with a child in the home and leave it on the kitchen floor, it's the gun shops fault if the kid shoots someone.

[evildead2099]

Well since the game shouldnt havee been in the hands of any children in the first place whats the deal.

If a little kid has fifty bucks in his pocket to spend anyway the parents are obviously messing up right there.

This is one of the few times when I find myself agreeing with you 100%, Sothy.

[evildead2099]

I would love to see parents take some of the blame. Should they be fined for just letting their kids play? No, each parent should know what's appropriate. If the kid pulls something stupid, then yes.

The real question is WHY the current system doesn't work. The movie rating system must work because there's no debate about it. The ESRB is far deeper.

I offer 2 explanations @ http://www.digitpress.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=66017

[evildead2099]

Well since the game shouldnt havee been in the hands of any children in the first place whats the deal.

If a little kid has fifty bucks in his pocket to spend anyway the parents are obviously messing up right there.

You're missing the point. This game was rated M for Mature, which is a guarantee that there is no blatant sexuality.

What the hell are you talking about? Sexuality does not equal an AO rating, and even if it did, that'd be pretty fucked up considering the fact that the rating system would be less concerned with impressionable audiences seeing illegal and harmful acts (violence) in all their gory glory than seeing perfectly legal and harmless acts of sexual intimacy.

[evildead2099]

So its ok that BMX XXX and God of War both got M ratings, right?

Did you miss the part where CJ stuck his dick into a woman on-camera? That's pornography, which is illegal to sell to a 17-year-old. M-rated games are 17+.

Sexual activity does not equal pornography, nor does mere nudity. I doubt you're even familiar with what constitutes pornography in a legal sense of the term.

[zmweasel]

What the hell are you talking about? Sexuality does not equal an AO rating, and even if it did, that'd be pretty fucked up considering the fact that the rating system would be less concerned with impressionable audiences seeing illegal and harmful acts (violence) in all their gory glory than seeing perfectly legal and harmless acts of sexual intimacy.

Thus far, the AO rating has only been issued to a handful of games with graphic sexual content. So, in fact, sexuality does equal an AO rating.

As for violence, as long as there's no blood, you can have any amount of violent content and earn a T. Add the blood and gore and you get the M.

-- Z.

[Mayhem]

That's likely a consequence of looking at a British woman during sexual activity.

I'll laugh at that if only because all my girlfriends have actually been non-British in origin LOL

@GameReviewGod - nudity laws and what you can buy on the shelves in Europe varies from country to country. You can get some right filth in places such as Holland, but that would be limited to licensed sex shops here in the UK. Much of it would not be let into the country in the first place.

Having said that, nudity and swearing are more tolerated (if you can direct compare here) than explicit violence on TV.

[evildead2099]

What the hell are you talking about? Sexuality does not equal an AO rating, and even if it did, that'd be pretty fucked up considering the fact that the rating system would be less concerned with impressionable audiences seeing illegal and harmful acts (violence) in all their gory glory than seeing perfectly legal and harmless acts of sexual intimacy.

Thus far, the AO rating has only been issued to a handful of games with graphic sexual content. So, in fact, sexuality does equal an AO rating.

What games HAVE received the AO rating? I was under the impression that the AO rating has yet to be applied to a game.

I remember seeing an 'adults only' rating on a vampire porn game for the 3DO console back before the ESRB became the standard rating system, but I've never seen the ESRB use its AO rating to classify a game.

[zmweasel]

What games HAVE received the AO rating? I was under the impression that the AO rating has yet to be applied to a game.

www.esrb.org is your friend.

http://www.esrb.org/search_results.asp?rat_6=Adults+Only+%2818%2B%29&count1=6&desID0=32&desID1=8&desID2=24&desID3=28&desID4=37&desID5=4&desID6=44&desID7=31&desID8=23&desID9=38&desID10=27&desID11=22&desID12=39&desID13=10&desID14=25&desID15=30&desID16=52&desID17=56&desID18=55&desID19=43&desID20=46&desID21=50&desID22=51&desID23=53&desID24=54&desID25=34&desID26=41&desID27=42&desID28=48&desID29=13&desID30=40&desID31=49&desID32=15&desID33=11&desID34=26&desID35=14&desID36=12&desID37=33&desID38=35&desID39=21&desID40=36&desID41=20&desID42=29&count2=43&platID0=12&platID1=17&platID2=18&platID3=19&platID4=20&platID5=32&platID6=42&platID7=5&platID8=34&platID9=33&platID10=22&platID11=39&platID12=3&platID13=6&platID14=43&platID15=41&platID16=36&platID17=24&platID18=11&platID19=30&platID20=25&platID21=37&platID22=46&platID23=26&platID24=13&platID25=14&platID26=31&platID27=7&platID28=8&platID29=15&platID30=10&platID31=4&platID32=40&platID33=16&platID34=45&platID35=35&platID36=44&count3=37&pub=&key=&type=game&validatePowerSearch=1&x=16&y=7

-- Z.

[tylerwillis]

Jeez... they're all (almost) PC/Mac games. Consoles don't seem to get hit. I was surprised that some console versions weren't on the list (Guy Game, Larry, Playboy).

Interesting.

[jajaja]

I havnt tried this patch myself yet, but I played GTA:SA today and I saw a woman giving head to a guy inside a crackhouse (early mission in the game). So it did already have porn in it. Again, I dont get why this have been blown up so much.

[Kitsune Sniper]

I haven't read the entire thread, but the incident reminds me of something...



Times have changed,
Our kids are getting worse
They won't obey their parents,
They just want to fart and curse!
Should we blame the government,
or blame society,
or should we blame the images on tv?

No!
Blame Canada! Blame Canada!

With all their beady little eyes,
their flapping heads so full of lies

Blame Canada!
Blame Canada!

We need to form a full assault, it's Canada's fault!

Don't blame me, for my son Stan
He saw the darn cartoon, and now he's off to join the klan!

And my boy Eric once, had my picture on his shelf,
but now when I see him, he tells me to fuck myself!

Well, Blame Canada!

It seems that everything's gone wrong
since Canada came along
Blame Canada!
Blame Canada!

They're not even a real country anyway.

My son could've been a doctor or a lawyer, it's a true,
Instead he burned up like a piggie on a barbecue!

Should we blame the matches? Should we blame the fire,
or the doctor who allowed him to expire?

Heck no!
Blame Canada!
Blame Canada!

With all their hockey hubaloo
and that bitch Anne Murray too!

Blame Canada!
Shame on Canada!

The smut we must stop
The trash we must smash
Laughter and fun
must all be undone
We must blame them and cause a fuss
Before somebody thinks of blaming us!


I don't have anything against Canada, but the song raises a good point. The game isn't meant for kids, and it's the PARENT'S OWN DAMN FAULT FOR LETTING THEM PLAY THE GAME. Instead of going out and raising hell against the company, they should uh, PREVENT their kids from playing games that are not for their age group UNLESS they know their kids can handle it.

Bloody americans...

[Kitsune Sniper]

Jeez... they're all (almost) PC/Mac games. Consoles don't seem to get hit. I was surprised that some console versions weren't on the list (Guy Game, Larry, Playboy).

Interesting.

The console versions most likely have content cut out. And besides, PC and MAC games don't require licensing to be put out, unlike console games, which means that on top of ESRB ratings, the game has to pass the console company's own censors (sometimes).

[zmweasel]

Jeez... they're all (almost) PC/Mac games. Consoles don't seem to get hit. I was surprised that some console versions weren't on the list (Guy Game, Larry, Playboy).

Interesting.

The Guy Game is just tits, so it skates with an M. Larry has tits and a played-for-laughs sex scene, but you never see genitals, so it skates with an M. Playboy has tits and sexual encounters, but the humpers keep their underwear on (!), so it skates with an M.

The question becomes, what about San Andreas's sex scene would have warranted an AO? That it's interactive? That it's not played for laughs?

-- Z.