San Andreas : AO!

[goatdan]

If the game industry had any pull, it would've quickly organized a spirited defense of Rockstar and clearly explain why this hack shouldn't have changed the M rating. Instead, Rockstar got caught in a stupid lie, and the ESRB flushed its credibility down the toidey.

The problem though is that the content is on the disks no matter what. While it is a hack, it is accessable with relatively normal devices (GameShark or whatever) which I think would be hard to defend.

"The game is rated M unless you get a third party adaptor and unlock new stuff!" I just don't think that would fly with most people, and would make R* / the ESRB look even stupider.

The fact that the ESRB hasn't fined them is what makes the ESRB look toothless. Especially because R* kept claiming this "Oh, the hackers did it all!" business which was obviously a like, the ESRB should smack them with some sort of fine that is enough to make other companies think twice about leaving material that would significantly alter the ratings on their games -- whether found or not. R* is a company that can afford it and the ESRB needs to set a precident so that they can present the "We dealt with the problem" response that needs to happen so we don't have to keep hearing the "GOVERNMENT MUST RATE GAMES!" crap.

By the ESRB (so far, at least) seemingly saying, "Well, we screwed up, but we can't blame you at all." Until the ESRB fines them, this does seem to be an issue of, "We can't police ourselves!"


I believe the GoldenEye level was discovered after the game was dumped to PC, not with a GameShark. In addition, that content was discovered, what, six or seven years after the game's release?

As for the PS2 Action Replay codes, those came about after the PC hackers figured out where to look in the San Andreas program code, most of which was presumably the same across all versions.

Regardless, I think that the simple fact that you can access it is the problem. It is on all the copies. It is accessable with relatively simple methods. It is a problem. and it shouldn't have been programmed into the game in the first place.


Seriously? They are going after gameshark? LOL LOL

What a bunch of dopes R* are! Gameshark didn't make the content, R* did. Gameshark didn't leave the content on the game media, R* did. Same can be said for the mod creators.

From GameSpot:


A Rockstar spokesperson said the company was considering legal action against Action Replay, GameShark, and other makers of console cheat devices that allow access to the sex minigames.

*shrug* They really don't have a case...


If they are going ahead with this, I think it sounds more like a "we're SOOOO edgy" stunt that backfired fully in their face and now they are trying to take anyone else down with them they can. (And make up for some of the revenue loss via litagation)

Me too. And quite frankly, they'll make up all their revenue and then some when the game goes back on sale. This is probably a good time to get some Take 2 stock.


The doomsday predictions of a government sponsored ratings system seem a little over edge, but it could be because Im only slightly familiar with U.S politics...

US Politics would most definitely screw things up... badly. Our government can't be trusted to be fair at all when they pay off news writers and stuff...

[Gamereviewgod]

Should a movie be re-rated if it comes to DVD with new footage? What about deleted scenes?

They don't even HAVE ratings, simply stating the features do not carry ratings. That seems far more dangerous and much harder for a parent to figure out.

The only way Rockstar should be punished if for lying. Someone finding the content is not their fault, and how did it take so long for people to find this? If it's on the console versions, why didn't someone see this earlier?

[sharkbates]

In short:

- The ESRB needs to change their policies so this won't happen again, and if it does the game companies will be forced to pay a fine not just because of lessened sales of a game.
- It sucks that the Republicans can use this as an issue to make a big fuss about. But I think that unfortunately it was just a matter of time before they found some game to bitch about. It wasn't like the game industry or the ESRB would've done anything differently otherwise.
- R* had to know that the data could have -- and probably would have been found through time if they left it on there. There has been secret data found in tons of released popular games before.
- Even if Liberty City Stories is delayed for the PSP, this means that the game will get three times as much publicity at launch.
- The AO rating may begin to get used more and more often, which would lend some credibility to the ESRB as well as prove that AO games can sell enough to make money, which would actually push creative boundaries.

So, like I've been saying all along... this is something I've been expecting for a while, and hopefully good will come from it.

Im sorry. I understand that most of the religous right organizations are affiliated with the Republican party, but the two most vocal senators to take on the question of videogame ratings in recent years have been Lieberman and Hilary Clinton, both DEMOCRATS. Now who is going to garner more attention to a cause, some extremist religous group that most people will dismiss as extremists or Joseph Lieberman and Hilary Clinton-two of the most publicly recognized Democrats in the Senate???

You make it sound like this is some Republican-only agenda. This hoopla comes from both sides and even more so is currently being used politically by H. Clinton to further show her "conservative" stance on issues. http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=7660

Otherwise, you make some good points, especially in regard to the ESRB needing to basically take the bull by the horns of this mess before Congress decides too.

Sorry, I DIGRESS from the issue.

This game was already rated M. If children are playing the game, it is their parents fault and responsibility. BOTTOM LINE. Does anyone ever take personal responsibility anymore? Should children play this type of game? Probably not, but parents need to make this INFORMED decision, which most dont, as they dont even know what the games they buy for their kids are about!!


Yes the game is about you being a thug/gang-banger, as are basically the previous two, but there are consequences for your actions in the game. If you murder someone or steal a car your wanted status goes up and you are hunted down by the police. Does anyone mention that there are ethical/moral consequence to your choices in the game? Never. You dont have to have sex with hookers and kill them. Its not a mission goal. You can, but you dont have too. If your children are, then maybe that says something about them.

The media always talk in broad generalizations, like all VGs are like this, but they are almost always only talking about GTA. Does anyone call them out on this fact that one game does not speak for all games? They are always telling us that not all Muslims are terrorists just because of the actions of a few extremists, well its the same with VGs, not all games are GTA. :angry:

[esquire]

question: will the m-rated version ever be considered rare since about 898935893896 copies have been sold?

True, but what about the XBOX version? Didn't that just come out? I predict that will be the rare copy to have.

[GarrettCRW]

I'm not asking if R* should be held accountable for the data on the disc. I'm asking if R* should be held accountable for what third parties do with that data (including illegal modifications to software and/or hardware).

-- Z.

The law says that Rockstar shouldn't be held accountable for the actions of third parties using game data, particularly since it's against the user agreement.

This mess sets a scary precedent, as while the game should be recalled (like the infamous Tiger Woods disc), the ESRB shouldn't have re-rated the game. As stupid as Rockstar is for leaving the data in the game (largely to make the almighty Christmas buying season), it's not their fault that someone else went spelunking for secrets in the SA code.

[slip81]

question: will the m-rated version ever be considered rare since about 898935893896 copies have been sold?

True, but what about the XBOX version? Didn't that just come out? I predict that will be the rare copy to have.

Isn't the Xbox version still only an M title though? Cause I haven't heard of a code that unlocks hot coffee for the Xbox.

And besides they are going to release another M rated version of the game with the code completely taken out, so unless someone finds a way to crack hot coffee on the Xbox there will be no discernable diffrence between the two, except maybe the serial codes printed on the disk.

But again if you can't get HC on the xbox no one will care.

[slip81]

Isn't the ESRB, like the MPAA, explicis lyrics and Comics Code optional anyway? Media can be released with out a code, it just means that it will most likely be confined to specialy shops and indie theatres.

Rockstar should just forget the ESRB and open up their own chain of game stores. That way they can put whatever they want into the games. They could have the protagonist of the next GTA fucking sheep and eating babies and the government wouldn't be able to do anything.

And if it's unrated, you can sell it to anybody, including little Timmy who just got $50 for his tenth birthday.

[GarrettCRW]

but the two most vocal senators to take on the question of videogame ratings in recent years have been Lieberman and Hilary Clinton, both DEMOCRATS.

In name only. Lieberman is the most conservative member of the party in the Senate, and Connecticut liberals are looking to get rid of him in '06 (and good riddance). Hillary is just as conservative-she is, after all, a former Goldwater Girl. She only bolted the party because of Nixon's rise to power in 1968, when the Republican party began resorting to dirty tricks and zealotry (as the Republican administrations from that point forward have featured many of the same folks in high positions). If Ted Kennedy of Barbara Boxer, two hard-core liberals, were getting face time on this, then you'd have a point.

[Captain J]

Incidentally, there was a similar situation a few years back with a very different response. The PSX version of Test Drive Le Mans had an episode of South Park hidden on the disc, which could be accessed by putting the disc in a computer. Surely the content in the episode (because being trouble because of copyright violation) would've pushed Le Mans into M territory? I don't remember any uproar or "retroactive" decision back then.

Was it Test Drive Le Mans or Tiger Woods PGA Tour '99? I thought it was the latter.

And it wasn't an episode of South Park; it was "The Spirit of Christmas," a raunchy short commissoned as a Christmas gift to Fox executives, that ended up as a "pilot" of sorts for South Park.

But you're right that it was M-rated content on an E-rated game's disc, and that it was inaccessible in-game (you had to play the video file on a PC). EA "recalled" the game at the time, but I don't know that any retailers bothered.

-- Z.

It was a Tiger Woods game, but I keep thinking it was '98 (but it probably was '99)... I remember getting the game in at my dad's store in late '98, early '99, put it in the PC, and behold... a file called zzzzzzz.***

It was Tiger Woods 99 and the PC file you are referring to was called ZDummy, just put the disc in, and you can cut and paste the file to your hard drive, i have had the file on mine since the day it came out! It is a Quicktime Movie file and the quality looks like it was taken from a VCR, still good and it features Jesus and Santa Claus having a mini DBZ like battle over which one shuld represent Christmas.

[Griking]

Shooting cops in the head is fine for little 12yr old Jimmy but as soon as their is some interactive dry-humping its a sin.

Hello, people were campaigning for the AO rating for GTA before the latest controversy came to light. The sex was just the final straw IMO.

[goatdan]

Im sorry. I understand that most of the religous right organizations are affiliated with the Republican party, but the two most vocal senators to take on the question of videogame ratings in recent years have been Lieberman and Hilary Clinton, both DEMOCRATS. Now who is going to garner more attention to a cause, some extremist religous group that most people will dismiss as extremists or Joseph Lieberman and Hilary Clinton-two of the most publicly recognized Democrats in the Senate???

You make it sound like this is some Republican-only agenda. This hoopla comes from both sides and even more so is currently being used politically by H. Clinton to further show her "conservative" stance on issues. http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=7660

You're absolutely right, and I'm sorry about that. I guess that I just get the two sides mixed up all the time (usually Republicans want to ban free speech, and lately its been all Democrats). Quite frankly, I'm sick of them all. I want a third party, that isn't full of retards.


This mess sets a scary precedent, as while the game should be recalled (like the infamous Tiger Woods disc), the ESRB shouldn't have re-rated the game. As stupid as Rockstar is for leaving the data in the game (largely to make the almighty Christmas buying season), it's not their fault that someone else went spelunking for secrets in the SA code.

The reason the game was re-rated and not recalled was because a recall would've cost R* millions more, if not billions more. The ESRB used the most toothless option -- no fines, no recall, new rating. It only makes them look bad and useless. I think that R* could come out of this with an even bigger seller when it goes back on sale.


Isn't the ESRB, like the MPAA, explicis lyrics and Comics Code optional anyway? Media can be released with out a code, it just means that it will most likely be confined to specialy shops and indie theatres.

Rockstar should just forget the ESRB and open up their own chain of game stores. That way they can put whatever they want into the games. They could have the protagonist of the next GTA fucking sheep and eating babies and the government wouldn't be able to do anything.

And if it's unrated, you can sell it to anybody, including little Timmy who just got $50 for his tenth birthday.

Personally, I think that's genius! R* would be TOTALLY pushing the limits then!

Grand Theft Barnyard: Baby Eater!

[AFGiant]

I just scanned the thread, so I'm sorry if I missed any discussion on this.

Is there gonna be a really sought after version of GTA: SA now? Like, the PC/Xbox version with the M rating and the minigame still in tact? Will they disappear quickly (probably not, with all the copies out there) but will they go up in price? I'd like to get my hands on a collectable version posthaste, before a price rise in it.

[SamuraiSmurfette]

I manage an EB games in Canada.
My instructions today were to pull it off the shelf, and put it away. (not send it back)
It will still be sold apon request, we just can't display it in any fashion (including posters).
So we'll continue selling it. It's not getting recalled. You just have to be 18+ with ID, and ask for it.

(then I conspicuously hand it over in a brown paper bag)

..unrelated rant...
I think Flatout should have garnered an 'M'. That game makes me ill :(

[Griking]

nevermind.

[kainemaxwell]

nevermind.
I did like the fact of the Vice City poster on the girlfriend's wall.

[zmweasel]

The problem though is that the content is on the disks no matter what. While it is a hack, it is accessable with relatively normal devices (GameShark or whatever) which I think would be hard to defend.

The content is on the disc, yes, but--and here's the incredibly important legal distinction--it CANNOT BE ACCESSED via normal gameplay. It requires the application of a third-party patch (for the PC version) or the use of a third-party utility (for the PS2/Xbox versions). Rockstar should not be held responsible in any way for the actions of third parties or the effects of their mods/utlities, but the ESRB has decided that Rockstar should be held accountable. That boggles my mind, and that's why I want Rockstar to sue the third parties. This is an insane precedent that opens up every game developer and publisher to unwarranted legal and financial risk.

I notice that an MSNBC tech reporter picked up on exactly what I said earlier in this thread (or was it another?) about how this mess is going to stifle game design:

"Another catch is that the game-development process involves programming concepts or levels that are never fully explored but left in games because altering or removing them could cause other parts to stop working."


The fact that the ESRB hasn't fined them is what makes the ESRB look toothless.

What's the purpose of a fine? Rockstar is already losing at least $50 million on the recall, recoding, and remanufacture of an M-rated version that's exactly the same as the retro-rated AO version.


Regardless, I think that the simple fact that you can access it is the problem. It is on all the copies. It is accessable with relatively simple methods. It is a problem. and it shouldn't have been programmed into the game in the first place.

See, it doesn't matter how "simple" or "difficult" it is. The point is that you can't access this dormant content without the illegal use of a third-party utility.

Should the sequence have been programmed into the game? I'm not going to second-guess the designers of a fantastic game who decided, for whatever reason, not to use the sequence in the final product.

(I think it's an absolutely hilarious sequence myself, and very much in keeping with the tone of the game and the series.)

-- Z.

[zmweasel]

They don't even HAVE ratings, simply stating the features do not carry ratings. That seems far more dangerous and much harder for a parent to figure out.

And unrated DVDs are happily sold in huge numbers (here's an excellent article (http://ktla.trb.com/entertainment/movies/stv-070505ent-movies-comedies,0,6312529.htmlstory?coll=ktla-movies-5) about the phenomenon) by the hypocritical bastards at Wal-Mart.


The only way Rockstar should be punished if for lying. Someone finding the content is not their fault, and how did it take so long for people to find this? If it's on the console versions, why didn't someone see this earlier?

'Cause the console versions were too hard to sort through, but the PC version was relatively easy to crack.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

The problem though is that the content is on the disks no matter what. While it is a hack, it is accessable with relatively normal devices (GameShark or whatever) which I think would be hard to defend.

The content is on the disc, yes, but--and here's the incredibly important legal distinction--it CANNOT BE ACCESSED via normal gameplay. It requires the application of a third-party patch (for the PC version) or the use of a third-party utility (for the PS2/Xbox versions). Rockstar should not be held responsible in any way for the actions of third parties or the effects of their mods/utlities, but the ESRB has decided that Rockstar should be held accountable. That boggles my mind, and that's why I want Rockstar to sue the third parties. This is an insane precedent that opens up every game developer and publisher to unwarranted legal and financial risk.

I think that it really comes down to the fact that R* left the stuff on there, and accessable. If it wasn't, it clears up the whole situation very easily.


I notice that an MSNBC tech reporter picked up on exactly what I said earlier in this thread (or was it another?) about how this mess is going to stifle game design:

"Another catch is that the game-development process involves programming concepts or levels that are never fully explored but left in games because altering or removing them could cause other parts to stop working."

I agree, but I don't know how many games would program something this far out and then leave it out. As we already discussed, the other things that have been left on discs -- RE2 backgrounds, KOTORII dialouge, etc. -- have been things that would not have the possibility of changing the rating. This does.


What's the purpose of a fine? Rockstar is already losing at least $50 million on the recall, recoding, and remanufacture of an M-rated version that's exactly the same as the retro-rated AO version.

A fine would've shown people (specifically politicians) that the ESRB can actually police itself. Changing the game to an AO rating after the fact makes it look like the ESRB screwed up by not rating it correctly the first time, and without any sort of fine it seems to me that the ESRB is essentially saying, "This was our fault."

Fine them and say, "No. You can't do stuff like this." because otherwise it doesn't give the developers any reason to not try to skirt the rules still. Sure, R* downgraded themselves by $50 million for the quarter, but when the game goes back on sale they will probably make it up. And besides that, they aren't recalling the games that are already out there. They simply aren't being carried by as many outlets.


See, it doesn't matter how "simple" or "difficult" it is. The point is that you can't access this dormant content without the illegal use of a third-party utility.

It isn't an illegal use of a third-party utility though. Nintendo Vs. Galoob already proved that. Everything that is being done is legal (except perhaps the computer patch, but that is another story). The problem is that it would be unfair and unrealistic to put an "AO" on the third party utilities that open this material up.

It's a real quandary, for sure:

- You have the game, which by itself it gets an "M" rating.
- You have an accessory, which by itself does nothing.
- In the case of this particular game, by combining the two, you get a scene that makes the game into a game that the ESRB feels should have been rated "AO".

You can't put the label on the accessory, because by itself it does nothing. You don't really want to change the game, because it hurts the industry... but the code is on the game itself. Again -- what if R* wanted this to be discovered to sell more copies of the game and that backfired? I think it simply _has_ to be re-rated because there isn't another easy option. Not like that is the perfect solution, but it is about all they can do.

If it was a patch for the game that added / altered code, that would be different completely. This patch only unlocks an existing sequence.

It's a grey area, but I don't see a better option.


Should the sequence have been programmed into the game? I'm not going to second-guess the designers of a fantastic game who decided, for whatever reason, not to use the sequence in the final product.

(I think it's an absolutely hilarious sequence myself, and very much in keeping with the tone of the game and the series.)

Personally, from having seen it as well as the pictures, I think it is pretty funny too... and truth be told, I bet that a company would be able to make a great dating sim using the same style stuff. I think that it would've been very easy for R* to release two versions of the game -- a M version without the minigame (and perhaps toning down a few other aspects) and an AO version with it. I think that it would've really proved that the AO version can sell.

One final thought -- anyone wonder if they sent the game footage to the ESRB with the minigame in it, and then the ESRB saw it and said that it would be rated AO unless the footage was removed, so they just did a quick hack to change it? Personally, I think that could be exactly what happened, and to me it would explain a lot...

[zmweasel]

I think that it really comes down to the fact that R* left the stuff on there, and accessable. If it wasn't, it clears up the whole situation very easily.

But it's NOT accessible! :) Not without an illegal third-party modification to the program code, which is a crucial distinction.


I agree, but I don't know how many games would program something this far out and then leave it out. As we already discussed, the other things that have been left on discs -- RE2 backgrounds, KOTORII dialouge, etc. -- have been things that would not have the possibility of changing the rating. This does.

Not so! "The Spirit of Christmas" video clip on Tiger Woods '99 was unquestionably M-rated material, and couldn't be accessed via normal gameplay. Why didn't the ESRB change that game's rating from E to M? I'd *love* for someone to pose this question to Patricia Vance.


Fine them and say, "No. You can't do stuff like this." because otherwise it doesn't give the developers any reason to not try to skirt the rules still. Sure, R* downgraded themselves by $50 million for the quarter, but when the game goes back on sale they will probably make it up. And besides that, they aren't recalling the games that are already out there. They simply aren't being carried by as many outlets.

I harbor a suspicion that the ESRB didn't levy a fine because it didn't want to provoke Rockstar into taking legal action for the ESRB's extremely dubious decision.

Which major retail outlets are still carrying SA at this point?


It isn't an illegal use of a third-party utility though. Nintendo Vs. Galoob already proved that.

I'm confident that a legal eagle could argue a distinct difference between the Nintendo/Galoob case and a Rockstar/Datel case, that the use of the Action Replay violates SA's end-user license agreement. In particular, this graf:

"You agree not to adapt or otherwise modify, create any derivative work, or decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, or otherwise attempt to derive any source code from, the Program (or any portion thereof), except and only to the extent that, nonwithstanding such restrictions, such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law."

There's no question that, at the very least, the PC mod violates the terms of this graf.


One final thought -- anyone wonder if they sent the game footage to the ESRB with the minigame in it, and then the ESRB saw it and said that it would be rated AO unless the footage was removed, so they just did a quick hack to change it? Personally, I think that could be exactly what happened, and to me it would explain a lot...

That's a strong possibility.

-- Z.

[kevincure]

Zach...EULAs are essentially legal bullshit. They are unenforceable. There's actually a major debate right now about "clickwrap" protection and what it can protect, but the basic principle is that a) copyright is limited by fair use, b) this use can't be "expanded", in most cases, but the use of clickwrap. It's really a grey area, though - for instance, you can't put a legally enforceable note on a book that says "this book cannot be resold," but you could enforce an EULA that involves trade secrets (say, for a buyer purchasing and industry report from McKinsey). There is absolutely no way Rockstar oould win a suit against the utility makers on these grounds. There might be some kind of DMCA case, but the DMCA does have fair use exceptions and the hack clearly fits wihtin these bounds. Companies don't have a right not to be embarassed by their own stupidity.

I think it was goatdan who said it, and I agree: If R* would have just admitted they put the code on the disc, it was just an internal minigame that they removed from the game because it was inappropriate, and they simply had no idea that it would later be accessible, in combination with a voluntary recall, they would have much, much better off. Penny Arcade's new comic makes essentially the same point.

[Gamereviewgod]

'Cause the console versions were too hard to sort through, but the PC version was relatively easy to crack.


And they found the South Park piece quickly how?

[goatdan]

But it's NOT accessible! :) Not without an illegal third-party modification to the program code, which is a crucial distinction.

Well, that's where the debate essentially ends because there isn't a clear answer. Is the modification legal? Not necessarily by the EULA that you quoted before, however to be able to enforce an EULA agreement, you have to prove that you have enforced them in the past or essentially your claim means nothing.

I don't know, but I'd guess that R* hasn't been out trying to sue people over any other mods that have come out on any of their other games - and I'm guessing that there have been some (I haven't looked). And if they haven't, then to enforce it on GTA:SA wouldn't be a fair use of it.

Of course, the DMCA is so screwed up, R* can spend a lot of money and essentially make the law what they want it to be, so perhaps all of the previous copyright laws don't matter...


Not so! "The Spirit of Christmas" video clip on Tiger Woods '99 was unquestionably M-rated material, and couldn't be accessed via normal gameplay. Why didn't the ESRB change that game's rating from E to M? I'd *love* for someone to pose this question to Patricia Vance.

But Tiger Woods '99 was voluntarily recalled because of that content. People who got a copy of the game could return it for a newer version. R* wasn't going to (and really hasn't) recalled GTA:SA because of this.


I harbor a suspicion that the ESRB didn't levy a fine because it didn't want to provoke Rockstar into taking legal action for the ESRB's extremely dubious decision.

The thing though is that without a fine, the ESRB looks like a toothless organization that can't get things right. It is another real grey area, and while I think that the ESRB would've won in court, the fact it might go to court would undermine the ESRB in the eyes of game developers.

So what is the lesser evil -- Possibly losing the faith of the game developer who created you or losing the faith of congress, who could start making laws and screw up everything much worse.

Again, grey area and there isn't a clear answer.


Which major retail outlets are still carrying SA at this point?

Personally, I'd say Amazon would count at this point. Also, even though it is off the ebgames Web site, I think their stores still sell them if you ask. I saw some behind the counter when I was in one yesterday.


I'm confident that a legal eagle could argue a distinct difference between the Nintendo/Galoob case and a Rockstar/Datel case, that the use of the Action Replay violates SA's end-user license agreement. In particular, this graf:

"You agree not to adapt or otherwise modify, create any derivative work, or decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, or otherwise attempt to derive any source code from, the Program (or any portion thereof), except and only to the extent that, nonwithstanding such restrictions, such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law."

There's no question that, at the very least, the PC mod violates the terms of this graf.

Except for the part that says, "such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law." Then, as I've already mentioned, you've got the fact that they can't selectively decide to enforce the rules, and that would be working against them.

And really, I think it only applies to the computer version -- the other things that unlock it do none of the above.


I think it was goatdan who said it, and I agree: If R* would have just admitted they put the code on the disc, it was just an internal minigame that they removed from the game because it was inappropriate, and they simply had no idea that it would later be accessible, in combination with a voluntary recall, they would have much, much better off. Penny Arcade's new comic makes essentially the same point.

Yup. The voluntary recall would've sucked their ass and it would've lost them a LOT of money, but it would've saved them (and especially the ESRB) a lot of face. Besides that, recalling only the games that are on shelves and offering a new version to anyone else who had an old copy would probably not get much in the way of returns. People who have it should be old enough to view such acts themselves or they probably don't care as it is. Compared to what the rest of the game is like, it isn't really that much more extreme. I doubt that even 1/10th of the sold copies would be returned, and this whole mess would've been over.

[FantasiaWHT]

Haven't read more than the first page, but...

EB Games will continue to sell the full AO version, but we've pulled it from the shelves and only sell it from behind the counter, assumably until we get AO stickers. As far as I'm aware, Gamestop and the big retailers (Best Buy, Walmart) have pulled it.

So in other words we got dozens of calls today asking if we still were selling it hehe

[SamuraiSmurfette]

well, I got the official recall notice for all new copies of GTA:SA from EB Canada.
we'll be selling through the remaining preowned copies (kept out of sight) and won't be taking any more in on trade.

[unbroken]

has anyone looked at ebay prices on san andreas lately? 80+ dollars

[slip81]

Not $80, but a fairly humerous title and description:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8207208745&category=62053&rd=1

[cr0n0]

I still don't understand. This game was given a rating of Adult because someone found sexual content in it?? WTF???? So in other words, it's okay to show some dude walk down the street, pummel a whore with a baseball bat before carjacking a lady by shooting her with a shotgun and then running over people with the car, but the minute some type of sex content pops up, the rating of the game ups a notch? It should have been Adult rated to begin with.

Little Billy can play the super ultra violent game, just make sure no sex is involve. That's why this society is so messed up right now. Violence is treated almost normal, like nothing out of the ordinary, but catch a glimpse of a nipple somplace and the censorship groups and media regulators are cracking down on you faster than you can blink.

[segarocks30]

i think its totally ridiculous that sex is so hush hush dont do it...but violence? sure you can blow off any many heads as you want, just NO SEX!!!!

Sex creates life.....murder (in real life) is sick, not sex, gimme a break....people are totally stupid...I think games like Manhunt need an AO rating...

this reminds me of Sin City, where I heard of kids being allowed to go see it, as long as there was no sex....Jesus H Christ...people have their prioritys totally fucked up...

note: I loved San Andreas, but it does deserve an AO...AO doesnt mean its a bad game, it can still be a wicked game...but violence is worse than sex anyday.

we live in a very upside down world...sorry if i rambled a bit, im being rushed :P Yea how do you think we were created, violence? Sex is basically a naural part of life.

[Gamereviewgod]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/gta4/news_6129723.html

Federal investigation now under way.

[goatdan]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/gta4/news_6129723.html

Federal investigation now under way.


In a statement, Upton recently said he was "outraged by the brazenness of Rockstar Games in their effort to do an end-run around the ratings system.... Rockstar Games’ deceit has severely undermined the integrity of the ratings system."

This is exactly the reason that the damn ESRB should've fined them. Because this investagation will do nothing but undermine the ESRB and prove that the ESRB didn't want to do anything to hurt themselves, and that R* was completely lying about the scene being "added" by hackers. Nothing good comes out of this.


It also raises the possibility that there could be a penalty imposed if an investigation finds that the publisher committed fraud in obtaining the M rating for San Andreas.

And there will be a fine, and it won't be by the ESRB, and the credibility of the entire system will get even worse.

Damn did everyone involved sure screw this up. If R* hadn't been so damn stupid in their "defense" and if the ESRB actually realized what their actions would result in, none of this would be going on right now...

:angry:

[evil_genius]

i saw some 10 year old girl raving about how much she liked GTA: SA the other day. i was scanning through the snes archives and she was shopping with her mother and two brothers.

question: will the m-rated version ever be considered rare since about 898935893896 copies have been sold?

For some reason I think the AO will be more rare.

[portnoyd]

As if this should be news to anyone, but our legislative branch is fucking stupid. If I can figure out that it's not part of the damn game, why can't they?!

[ubersaurus]

As if this should be news to anyone, but our legislative branch is fucking stupid. If I can figure out that it's not part of the damn game, why can't they?!

Because the legislature has to go with whatever knee-jerk reaction their constituents are for, and if they've never played the game, they don't really have much base to fall back on.

Add that to the fact that, by it's very nature, the legislature is behind the times of society, you can't expect them to agree with us.

You should really talk to my friend sometime, as a lawyer and student of governmental law, she raelly knows her shit on this sort of thing.

[Griking]

As if this should be news to anyone, but our legislative branch is fucking stupid. If I can figure out that it's not part of the damn game, why can't they?!

Yeah, everybody is stupid if they don't have the same opinion as you do. Isn't it possible that most people here on this videogame website may be just a little bit baised in their opinions on all of this?

[esquire]

As if this should be news to anyone, but our legislative branch is fucking stupid. If I can figure out that it's not part of the damn game, why can't they?!

Yeah, everybody is stupid if they don't have the same opinion as you do. Isn't it possible that most people here on this videogame website may be just a little bit baised in their opinions on all of this?

Exactly. Moreover, it doesn't matter if it isn't part of the game. Developers must disclose all content on their product, regardless of whether its part of the game; regardless of whether it can only be accessed by modders or hackers. Even more so, the developer is responsible for all content, whether they know about it or not, e.g. they left it there by accident. These are the ESRB's own guidelines. If you don't believe me, check it out here (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/07/21/news_6129557.html).

Now if you honestly believe that R* "accidently" left the code on the game, well fine. Frankly I don't buy that. Developers purposefully leave easter eggs and other hidden items on their games all the time.

I think the bigger question is why did R* even program that code to begin with? What were they thinking?

[Mr.FoodMonster]

They weren't deciving anyone. They took it out of the game, but left the code in there. So what, they never expected some guy to dig through the code and find it. And should they have? NO. N fucking O.

[SoulBlazer]

Okay, I'm hoping someone will read this -- I have'nt said much about this controversy due to feeling my thoughts will be ignored due to all the other threads. ;) And speaking of other threads, I'm going to pull in thoughts and observations from them as well.

First off, what are you talking about, Mr Food Monster? Normaly I agree with most of your posts, but Rockstar should have known that SOMEONE would find the mini game.

It's IRRESPONSIBLE for ANY publisher, in this current day and age with modders and hackers and Action Replay devices and so on, to expect that any unused content on a game CD WILL NOT BE FOUND. PERIOD.

Why was the minigame left on the SA game disc? I can think of three possible reasons:

1) They did'nt think anyone would find the minigame, which as I allready said, was stupid on their part.
2) They expected someone WOULD find the game, and the publicity would be good for them, not blow up in their face.
3) Removing the game would be too time consuming (meeting a deadline) and/or introduce bugs in the game, so they just branched around it (this has been done since the start of video games).

Personally, I'm inclined to believe reason 3 is the most likley answer, although 2 could also be part of it.

In the old days, there was nothing wrong with leaving unused game content on a cart or CD. Now, with all the moders and hackers and cheat devices out there, it WILL be found!

And the others are correct in saying that it should have been disclosed to the ESRB under their own guidelines. Rockstar is in some SERIOUS deep shit here, both for lying about this in the first place and for violating the ESRB guidelines. It's too bad the ESRB does'nt have the power to do anything about it beyond what they have allready done (change the game to a AO rating), which is why the government is stepping in.

I don't think this will hurt the ESRB that much. It almost seems like the government wants to SUPPORT them, by taking their side and pointing the finger at Rockstar and Take-Two and saying 'see, we did'nt know ANYTHING about this. It's YOUR fault for leaving this on there'. I would'nt mind seeing a little government action -- not too much, nothing like a government rating code that is mandatory, but maybe give the ESRB some more power and put the fear of God into publishers.

The Gamespot interview with the head of the ESRB was very interesting as well. Basicaly, although I feel the ESRB can do better with reviewing games and giving ratings, they gave SA the rating of Mature based on what they had seen. They did not know about the unused sexual mini game. THEY DID NOT KNOW, so they felt the M rating was good. When news of the minigame came out, the ESRB had no choice but to look at their rating in light of the new game content -- which is easy enough for anyone to get at -- and change it to a AO.

It's the same thing as if a FPS was at first given a T rating and then a 'blood and gore' code was discovered that made the game much more mature and violent and graphics and the rating was changed to a M.

Maybe now this investigation will bring out the burning questions we all want to know from Rockstar and Take-Two about this mess -- whose idea was the minigame, why was'nt it taken out, and why was'nt it reveled to the ESRB when the game was undergoing review, as the ESRB's own guidelines require it to be?

Is there too much of a big deal being made of this? Yes, for sure. I blame the parents and the politicans and the whole society for some of this, as we're too damn uptight about sex. The mini game is really NOT that bad. But video games are still a whipping child just like rock music and comic books was in the past, and Rockstar and the ESRB have created a REAL mess for the entire industry. If only Rockstar had'nt lied about this and the ESRB had done more besides change the rating (fine, etc.) things would be better.

I want to see out of this mess:

1) Publishers telling the ESRB about ALL the content on the game disc when it's up for review, even the unused stuff.
2) The ESRB doing a better job of reviewing and rating games.
3) The ability to fine publishers for violating guidelines.
4) The ability to fine or stop shipments to stores that break the age guidelines
5) The government supporting the ESRB in their efforts to make the above things happen, but NOT to the goverment passing new laws or a federal rating system.

I just hope some of the above things happen. Maybe some good will come out of all of this. I hope. :)

Now all we can do is batten down the hatches and hope for the best.

[Promophile]

I still don't understand. This game was given a rating of Adult because someone found sexual content in it?? WTF???? So in other words, it's okay to show some dude walk down the street, pummel a whore with a baseball bat before carjacking a lady by shooting her with a shotgun and then running over people with the car, but the minute some type of sex content pops up, the rating of the game ups a notch? It should have been Adult rated to begin with.

Little Billy can play the super ultra violent game, just make sure no sex is involve. That's why this society is so messed up right now. Violence is treated almost normal, like nothing out of the ordinary, but catch a glimpse of a nipple somplace and the censorship groups and media regulators are cracking down on you faster than you can blink.

Welcome to America.

[Griking]

They weren't deciving anyone. They took it out of the game, but left the code in there. So what, they never expected some guy to dig through the code and find it. And should they have? NO. N fucking O.

Yeah, because people NEVER look for hidden things in their videogames. People also never browse the contents of their game CDs looking for music and/or images that they can play on their computers or use as avatars and wallpaper. There's also no such thing as websites and magazines that publish codes to allow you to unlock things in games that otherwise wouldn't be accessable. Rockstar never thought that any of this would ever happen.

You are so nieve.

[goatdan]

The Gamespot interview with the head of the ESRB was very interesting as well. Basicaly, although I feel the ESRB can do better with reviewing games and giving ratings, they gave SA the rating of Mature based on what they had seen. They did not know about the unused sexual mini game. THEY DID NOT KNOW, so they felt the M rating was good. When news of the minigame came out, the ESRB had no choice but to look at their rating in light of the new game content -- which is easy enough for anyone to get at -- and change it to a AO.

It's the same thing as if a FPS was at first given a T rating and then a 'blood and gore' code was discovered that made the game much more mature and violent and graphics and the rating was changed to a M.

Maybe now this investigation will bring out the burning questions we all want to know from Rockstar and Take-Two about this mess -- whose idea was the minigame, why was'nt it taken out, and why was'nt it reveled to the ESRB when the game was undergoing review, as the ESRB's own guidelines require it to be?

Agreed on all points. This has been a problem ever since the ESRB came into existance. Developers can easily deceive the ratings system, and the developers get no repurcussions if they do. Basically, it seems that people say, "This game should have a __ rating" and the ESRB says "okay" as long as the footage they provide backs them up. That's it.


If only Rockstar had'nt lied about this and the ESRB had done more besides change the rating (fine, etc.) things would be better.

Yup.


I want to see out of this mess:

1) Publishers telling the ESRB about ALL the content on the game disc when it's up for review, even the unused stuff.
2) The ESRB doing a better job of reviewing and rating games.
3) The ability to fine publishers for violating guidelines.
4) The ability to fine or stop shipments to stores that break the age guidelines
5) The government supporting the ESRB in their efforts to make the above things happen, but NOT to the goverment passing new laws or a federal rating system.

I agree. Hopefully, these things come across as you expect. I believe that number 3 already is available to the ESRB though (although unused) and that 2 will either remain up to developers or screw new small publishing houses.

[nate1749]

i skimmed through most of the replies, but didn't read everyones yet... I'm confused, what's the difference between MA and AO. What I mean is, you have to 17 to buy MA, how old are you supposed to be to buy AO? 18? If you're 17 you can go see R rated movies with sex scenes (real people not cartoons) right? Or do you have to be 18? I'm not trying to take a stance on anything here, just want someone to clarify for me.

Also, is all this commotion just because they tried to deceive the rating system... that's it? This is not the 1st time this has been done and there wasn't any ramifications for the examples I'm thinking of. Most specifically the South Park movie. The two guys tried to sneak everything by them, and even did on some things such as the title "Bigger, Longer, & Uncut," which the review panel initial approved and then later rejected once they found out it was refering to a penis. It was too late though for them to retract it so it went ahead. I don't see how that type of deception and trickery is any different - of course maybe I'm missing what the conflict is on this whole GTA thing.

Thanks,

Nate

[goatdan]

i skimmed through most of the replies, but didn't read everyones yet... I'm confused, what's the difference between MA and AO. What I mean is, you have to 17 to buy MA, how old are you supposed to be to buy AO? 18? If you're 17 you can go see R rated movies with sex scenes (real people not cartoons) right? Or do you have to be 18? I'm not trying to take a stance on anything here, just want someone to clarify for me.

It is essentially the difference between an R rated movie and an X rated move. You can't waltz into any normal movie theater and see a porn movie on a screen or walk into a large chain store and grab a hardcore porno mag. So an M rating is much more preferable to an AO rating.


Plus, is all this commotion just because they tried to deceive the rating system... that's it? This is not the 1st time this has been done and there wasn't any ramifications for the examples I'm thinking of. Most specifically the South Park movie. The two guys tried to sneak everything by them, and even did on some things such as the title "Bigger, Longer, & Uncut," which the review panel initial approved and then later rejected once they found out it was refering to a penis. It was too late though for them to retract it so it went ahead. I don't see how that type of deception and trickery is any different - of course maybe I'm missing what the conflict is on this whole GTA thing.

The South Park movie, which was pure genuis how they got it past the ratings board might I add, was completely different. The biggest difference was that it was a movie, and because of that fact, the ratings board for movies watched the entire movie and approved it for the R rating. With GTA:SA, the ratings people watch clips of the game that is supposed to be the most graphically intense parts and enough gameplay to show them the gist of what it is like. The GTA:SA "Hot Coffee" scenes were found to be more than what R* sent to the ESRB -- and on top of that, R* claimed that they had never done the scenes and that hackers had altered the code to put it in the game, something that was a complete lie.

The problems are:

1) R*'s lie was trying to decieve everyone about where this came from.
2) The ESRB had never run into this before
3) The ESRB board doesn't play the entire game, just watch portions of it to see what to rate it. They trust developers at their word. This also ties into problem #1.

[thegreatescape]

i skimmed through most of the replies, but didn't read everyones yet... I'm confused, what's the difference between MA and AO.

My ESRB is a little rusty, but I do believe that AO is the gaming equivalent of MA (MA is a movie rating).

[nate1749]

thanks goatdan, that makes more sense now.

Nate

[Gamereviewgod]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050727/ap_on_hi_te/video_game_lawsuit

A women is suing because she was dumb enough to buy the game for her grandson. :frustrated:

[nate1749]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050727/ap_on_hi_te/video_game_lawsuit

A women is suing because she was dumb enough to buy the game for her grandson. :frustrated:

"She sought unspecified damages on behalf of herself and all consumers nationwide, saying the company should give up its profits from the game for what amounted to false advertising, consumer deception and unfair business practices."

Yeah I'm sure some granny said that... Well truly the american way, when anything happens, just sue and hope for a settlement.

Nate

[portnoyd]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050727/ap_on_hi_te/video_game_lawsuit

A women is suing because she was dumb enough to buy the game for her grandson. :frustrated:

I swear to fuck, I can't take this shit any more. This is beyond stupid. And you know what?

I AM ONE HUNDRED PERCENT SURE THIS WOMAN HAS NOT PLAYED THE FUCKING GAME

False advertising and consumer deception? You mean, when they rated it M, and then had to change it to AO when a portion of the game WHICH IS NOT IN THE GAME was turned up?

I can't wait to hear how she and her lawyers want to define unfair business practices. That's way beyond left field right there.

Rockstar did the 'right' thing. Instead of releasing an AO game on the poor, defenseless, innocent, doe eyed public, they cut out the over-the-top part. The code being left in is irrelevant. I'm certain Rockstar will defeat this moronic granny no problem.[/b]

[kevincure]

I look forward to how that suit proceeds: "I bought this game for my grandson expecting there just to be some cop-killing, drug-running, gratuitous violence and prostitutes. But I'm shocked that Rockstar has also included a hidden minigame where two clothed avatars sorta simulate having sex! Such unexpected immorality!"

As for "what were they thinking," I think R* coded this minigame, then removed it from the final version when someone realized that they might be toeing just a bit too close to the line. Again, R* could've just said this from the start, done a voluntary recall, and never heard a word from the govt or the ESRB about it. But they made up a bullshit lie and now they're going to pay for it. To paraphrase Tom Wolfe, you can fool people with a lie, but it proves something to yourself: you're weak.

[Avenger]

i am also 100 percent sure the kid didnt even unlock the mini game..shes just tryin to cash in on the fact that it is there...even I dont know how to do it and im sure at least half of us here (or more) wouldnt spend the time to try and learn...i dont hate americans..i hate the ones that sue over everything....i knew something like this would happen

[Sockdude]

What people have to understand is that the sexual content of the game can't even be "unlocked" unless you want it to be. The user has the choice to install the mod if they feel they need to.

Also, have you guys seen the commercials for it now? It just sounds kind of awkward: "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, out now for Xbox. Rated AO for Adults Only.".

And for people not caring about the intense violence and blood in games, but a little nudity and the whole story changes, it's because we already had that controversy in 1993 with DooM and Night Trap. :P

[kainemaxwell]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050727/ap_on_hi_te/video_game_lawsuit

A women is suing because she was dumb enough to buy the game for her grandson. :frustrated:

And she's buying a game rated M/AO for a 14yo why?
:eek 2:

[evil_genius]

^^ Fine this lady for a) being absoluitely retarded b) for buying that for someone not of the age to buy it. It is just like buying ciggarettes for a minor. I heard on the news tonight that they are trying to make a law where websites will be responsible for minors viewing porn now, and they compared it to ciggarettes and beer/

[FantasiaWHT]

I heard on the news tonight that they are trying to make a law where websites will be responsible for minors viewing porn now, and they compared it to ciggarettes and beer/

I'd like the idea, but it's all but impossible to prove who's the one on the computer viewing any particular site. Way easier for the parent to prevent their minors from viewing porn than the website itself.

I approve of the notion of making all porn sites end with .xxx Then A) it's easier for parents to block those sites, and B) it's easier to prosecute websites who try to get around any restrictions.

[bargora]

Leno mentioned the 85-year-old grandma's lawsuit last night. He pointed out how stupid it was for her to buy him the game in the first place, considering that it's all about stealing cars and shooting cops. He then asked, "what, they were all out of beer and BB guns?"

[Raedon]

Yep, it's official. HERE'S (http://apnews.excite.com/article/20050720/D8BFBTN82.html) another link to confirm it.

And now that this is official it'll change absolutely nothing as adults, the audience that the game was supposingly always marketed to will still be able to purchase the game.

good, this opens the way for mad videogame sex.. :P Honestly I'm all for GTA being Adult only, the graphics and controls could kill.

[Raedon]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/gta4/news_6129723.html

Federal investigation now under way.

ahh.. our tax dollars at work. People are so dumb.

[Arcade Antics]

http://www.pvponline.com/archive/2005/pvp20050728.gif

[kainemaxwell]

http://www.pvponline.com/archive/2005/pvp20050728.gif
Funniest PvP I've read in awhile!

[Griking]

Two Fayette, Alabama police officers and a police dispatcher were brutally murdered by Devin Moore in 2003. Moore's trial continues today.

The facts in the case are not in dispute, but the defense has entered an insanity plea, claiming that Moore's state of mind was caused in part by obsessive playing of Grand Theft Auto III and Grand Theft Auto Vice City.

Link (http://www.gamepolitics.com/)

I know everyone's going to say that these people are idiots but it only adds fuel to the fires by providing proof of what legislators have been saying all along.

[FantasiaWHT]

http://www.pvponline.com/archive/2005/pvp20050728.gif
Funniest PvP I've read in awhile!

Except the ESRB has nothing to do with the "gub'ment"