Hot Coffee Cooling Off

The storm of media and cynicism that was "Hot Coffee" is, thankfully, coming to an end. To wrap things up, reactions were mixed to the re-rating of GTA. Some thought it too much, some too little too late. With the removal of the M rating, ESRB president Patricia Vance considers the matter closed. Even those in the industry itself seem glad that it's over, though the folks quoted for the 1up story seem cynical about the whole thing. "[Rockstar] TOTALLY screwed the modding community, as far as I am concerned. Because they could have just removed the content. They tried to get cute and leave it in. In my experience that sort of thing is always deliberate. Anyway, the point is that most game developers are recalcitrant and immature jerks. When mom tells us we can't do something, we're sure as hell going to do it. If you get my meaning. I think 'mom' in this case was the ESRB." As a sidenote, stock in Take-Two Entertainment dropped by almost five percent at close of market today, on the news that even Gamestop is dumping the now AO-rated GTA title.

Comments

Tshirt Already?

[ack154]

And as a keepsake for all of the madness... be sure to pick up your very own Hot Coffee t-shirt from ThinkGeek!

As soon as they're actually in stock, that is.

Re:Tshirt Already?

[themishkin]

Hahaha, check out Maddox's article on this whole thing! Always hilarious... http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=ti cket_to_hell

Re:Tshirt Already?

[Elminst]

and even more in the spirit of ./; you misspell "word" (work) while complaining about their spelling errors.
Meta meta spelling nazi?

It's about time!

[ChibiLZ]

I for one am very glad that this whole debacle is over. I think it's somewhat ridiculous that people are angry at Rockstar. AFAIK, GTA:SA is rated M for violence and sexual content. Why must it be AO now? This certainly wasn't hardcore porno, it was not even as bad as what you see on cable late at night.

And to think that GameStop is not going to sell the game anymore? Regardless, it's well out of the spotlight now, but the game they stop selling today is the game that they were hyping the hell out of for pre-orders 1 year ago. I don't care what the ESRB rating is, nothing has changed.

I certainly don't think kids should buy this game, regardless of the sex, they shouldn't be exposed to that kind of violent content. However, it's now a pain in the ass for me if I want to buy a copy. It seems I can no longer go into my local videogame store and pick it up, I'll have to order it online and wait. I wonder if it will arrive in a plain brown envelope. Wouldn't want the neighbors or mailman to know I'm getting such perverted things in the mail.

Re:It's about time!

[timeOday]

I think it's somewhat ridiculous that people are angry at Rockstar. AFAIK, GTA:SA is rated M for violence and sexual content. Why must it be AO now?

When you decieve somebody, their reaction when the truth comes out is greater than if you had told them the same thing upfront.

What annoys people about this is that Rockstar decieved both the industry and the public about the content of the game. So long as this occurs, consumers can't know what they're buying. OK, so you don't mind. But the point is people should have the information up front to make their own choice.

Re:It's about time!

[ipfwadm]

What annoys people about this is that Rockstar decieved both the industry and the public about the content of the game. So long as this occurs, consumers can't know what they're buying.

No, Rockstar didn't deceive anyone. When you went out and bought the game, there was no possible way that you were going to get exposed to this "sex scene" without knowingly going out of your way to enable it. No possible way. Therefore, the sex scene was not part of the "content of the game", and therefore Rockstar did not deceive anyone about the content of the game.

People's reaction to this is "greater than if you had told them the same thing upfront" because they don't understand what it's all about. They hear that there's a sex scene in the game and they pull out their pitchforks and torches. They probably think this is actually a scene you'd come across during normal gameplay, and therefore they do feel deceived.

Re:It's about time!

[PsiPsiStar]

You need to use a patch to see the scene.

It would be easier to watch porn using my web browser than it would be using this game.

Re:It's about time!

[krbvroc1]

I completely agree with you. The hoopla is so rediculous. Its almost someone giving you a formula for isolating the printed words in the latest Harry Potter book to form a short porn story. Take the 6th word, followed by 12th word, followed by 24th word, etc.

The content was not accessible without a mod. Furthermore, having seen the content, its not all that indecent especially for a 17 year old.

I'm trying to undertand where all this save the children rhetoric is coming from and my conclusion is that it makes for an easy target. One tangential concern I've encountered is that rated M (17+) games are widely sold to minors. The statistics I say came from one Parents Television Council so they are probably misleading and distorted if their reporting on other the facts in the case are a barometer. They claim more than 70 percent of teenagers, 'according to a Gallop Poll', have played a Grand Theft Auto game. I can't find the poll results but there is a lot of ways to mislead with that statistic.

Another 'statistic' from the groups behind the media frenzy:
'According to research by the National Institute on Media and the Family, games rated M, which means they are appropriate only for people aged 17 or older, are relatively easy for teenagers and even children as young as age 7 to obtain. In the National Institute's recent study, 50 percent of boys between the ages of 7 and 14 successfully purchased M-rated video games, and an astonishing 87 percent of boys play M-rated games. Furthermore, nearly a quarter of retailers in the study don't even understand the ratings they are supposed to enforce, and only half of the stores train employees in the use of the ratings.'

Re:It's about time!

[colinferm]

It's nice to hear a little bit of common sense.

Where this is coming from is that this country is in the same place, culturally, as we were with comic books in the 50's. At the time, all the great crime and horror comics were being published by one house (EC) and politicians - and one doctor who's name escapes me - screamed about how terrible this was for kids and how the nation was going to be full of little murderers if something wasn't done. There were congressional hearings, banner headlines, all the same as we're seeing right now for video games.

In response, the comics industry put together the "voluntary" Comics Code Of America which most DC and Marvel books carried into the mid-90's that included various draconian "guidelines" forbidding , for instance, a comic to show anything bad happening to a police officer.

The sad fact was that most of these books were picked up at news stands by bank clerks, butchers, and other adults who wanted something entertaining to read on their way to work and not so much by children. What the comics code did was essentially dumb down comics to the point that adults stopped reading them through out the 50's, 60's, and early 70's and basically put EC out of business since news stands wouldn't carry comics that didn't have the Comics Code stamp on their covers.

It's too bad to see that the same thing is happening today with video games. I mean, I read that the median - median, average - age of video gamers is 27. That said, if we can have movies - and thankfully, comic books again - for adults, why not video games also? The box says 17+, so is it Rockstar's fault if parents are buying nine year old little Johnny a game that includes violence and now sex? The common sense answer, as you've said, is no.

Anyway, just some history to go with it.

Re:It's about time!

[Fred Ferrigno]

Or, Rockstar disabled the content but left it there knowing that somebody was eventually going to find it - but not until after they'd been rated.

I view it as analogous to an easter egg on a DVD movie. Except for this easter egg, you have to know what you're looking for, use external hardware to get it, and spend several hours trying to find it. But other than that, an easter egg.

All DVDs nowadays come with a notice saying "DVD extras and commentary unrated" -- only the movie, the main content, the stuff you really paid to see, is rated. If you have to hit a dozen buttons to access the secret menu of hidden sex scenes cut from the movie, you probably know what you're in for. Nobody is going to protect you from what you worked so hard to find.

Now, if they would only add the video game version of "extras unrated", we'd be fine. People know (or should know) what GTA is when they buy it; is there really some uproar among consumers about this? You know, that game where you go around stealing cars, beating up hookers, and killing cops -- why, it has sex in it! It was fine for little Jimmy before, but not now! You must take it off the shelves and burn it!

Re:It's about time!

[thesandtiger]

Any game that is moddable can be modified in this way then, and therefore all game companies need to make it impossible for users to create and then distribute "disturbing" (whatever your definition of it is) content with the game - if we follow your logic. Which I don't, but I understand the attraction of it.

Rockstar made a mini-game and then didn't remove all of it from their game, but they didn't make it accessable by "normal" play (or ANY play), either. It requires a modification of the software, not just some code that needs to be entered at a pause point. ANY game that is moddable can be modified into providing content that people will be up in arms to.

Oh noes, someone made a mod that turns the monsters in Doom 3 into children, and all the weapons into sex toys! Clearly, Doom 3 needs to be made Adults Only!

Oh noes, someone made some skins for The Sims that make them nude, and Little Jimmy has now got a house full of naked polyamorous lesbians running around! Clearly, The Sims needs to be made Adults Only!

Oh noes, someone made skins for Morrowind that makes every NPC in the game into an extremely well-hung and otherwise well-endowed transsexual centaur! Clearly, Morrowind needs to be made Adults Only!

Oh noes, someone made a mod of Barbie's Baking Challenge that converts the pies she bakes into Jewish Children, and the Betty Crocker Cooking Campus into Auschwitz! Clearly, Barbie's Baking Challenge needs to be made - what, it's only monstrous violence and not sex? - well, Mature then.

I hate America

[Mr.Dippy]

Let's see the game is about black men running around smacking hoes and doing drive bys and most people don't have a problem with this. But, once you add some sex into the game there are congressional hearings. Stupid America, when will you ever learn?!

Re:I hate America

[Ced_Ex]

I wouldn't say America, more like those stuck up Holier-Than-Thou retards at the ratings board.

I can't see how sex is more evil than violence. Think of the utopia they want to have. A world with violence and no sex. Wait... wouldn't that be the fuckin apocalypse?

Re:I hate America

[Builder]

A world with violence and no sex. Wait... wouldn't that be the fuckin apocalypse?

Uhm, no it wouldn't. The fucking apocalypse will have sex. I think you're thinking of the regular apocalypse.

Re:I hate America

[DLWormwood]

I can't see how sex is more evil than violence. Think of the utopia they want to have... apocalypse?

The Biblical Book Of Revelations (aka "Apocalypse" in ancient languages) was written to describe the "end times" that Christians believe will happen that will finally wipe the Earth clean of evil. It is a very violent book, filled with surreal images of carnage and suffering, but very little sexual content. (It's almost the polar opposite of Song Of Solomon in that regard.) Christian culture (which the U.S. is heavily influenced by) has always regarded violence as a path of virture and sex as a path to damnation. (The whole "thou shalt not kill" business was a mistranslation of the original Hebrew; it refers to murder, not military warfare.)

Given that many of the more Evangelical types of Christian are now political savvy and powerful in post-Cold War American, it's little wonder that our culture is starting to "self-fulfill" the prophesies in the book. America's constant strife with Middle Eastern countries (and backing of Isreal) is inline with the "Battle Of Megido" depicted in that book. Most of the Fundamentalists in this country are expecting the "Rapture" to happen in their lifetime. I know; I used to be one growing up...

Re:I hate America

[chphilli]

I think you have a severe misunderstanding of the role of sex in the Christian life. Go pick up a copy of C. S. Lewis's Mere Christianity (most bookstores will have it), and read it. That should clear up a lot of the misunderstanding you seem to have about the issue.

Remind me why R* should care again

[BlackCobra43]

GTA: SA was the best-selling console game of 2004, despite only being published on one platform at the time. Are we seriously expected to believe major retailers will forever keep the evil, evil GTA games off their shelves? Why should Rockstar Games/Take Two?

Re:Remind me why R* should care again

[blueZhift]

In the short term, this whole deal seems to have backfired on Rockstar and they'll have to spend some money recalling shipped stock and then manufacturing and shipping the "clean" version. LOL, now mom and dad can safely buy GTA for junior and his 5th grade buddies! They should pick up the clean copies of 50cent's new album while they're at it.

Seriously though, Rockstar can still turn this into a New Coke style winner. Now they've essentially been given the green light to sell two versions of GTA: SA. They can sell the safe clean version at Wal-Mart and the uncut, girls gone wild, hentai version online. See now, they can just unlock the Hot Coffee minigames and add more if they want. With the AO label, they can totally cut loose and with all of the free publicity the market is already primed. It's almost as if they get to do the launch all over again. The only ones who could stop them from doing this might be Sony and Microsoft on the consoles since they have to be licensed to publish on those platforms. On the PC though, anything goes. Played right, R* may have opened the door a bit for AO versions of popular games to start appearing on consoles. As for the ESRB and modders everywhere, I think they've just been played...

Were we ever really surprised?

[bedroll]

I mean, the people who hated this game from before it was released were the same ones who made a stink of it this time. It was just a new angle to come at it. The realists say that the game was already rated M, which should've been good enough. The extremists think it should pulled from all shelves, AO isn't good enough.

I'm just waiting for the lawsuits. I'm sure that some offended conservative group is trying to find distress Moms who's little babies downloaded the patch to modify the game and were sullied. Poor little Johnny.

I for one...

[Phu5ion]

am going out to purchase this too-hot-for-Gamespot game. Then i'm going to make little kids play it. Call me The Pusher Man.

So..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

So they add a new label and it's done with. It's the same game it was last week, the same game it was last month and the same game it'll be tomorrow.

GTA:SA will sell no matter the age rating, anyone who wanted it already had it or knows where to get it. It's like closing the stable door once the horse has bolted.

The "it's for the children" groups will see this as a victory. The game industry will shrug and go "oh well" and the gamers will go "STFU and get over it, it's a game".

That's how life works. Give it a month and they'll find another way to attack GTA, do very little (oh they changed a letter and added another to the rating GASP! Think of the ink it'll use!), rinse and repeat.

Maybe we should start pointing out how GTA:SA is infact a POSITIVE story about a guy trying to get out the ghetto and deal with corrupt officials with too much power.

Well... at least

[Adult film producer]

I can still kill cops and pummel innocent bystanders with a club, smashing their brains in till blood oozes all over the sidewalk. Good family fun.

Re:I'm really puzzled

[tgd]

How do you know it was consensual?

I think the programmers made them do it!

Re:Good!

[Angry Toad]

I'll be taking it back to the shop as soon as possible and demanding they exchange it with a copy that is suitable for a child of his age.

Good idea. GTA is, with or without sexual content, utterly inapproriate for a 12 year old.

In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

This just in. "Real Life" has been re-rated AO by ESRB because it features the same violent and sexual content as GTA:SA.

Quote the leader: "We first noticed this when we found out there are a lot of people being invited for 'hot coffee' everywhere! This has to stop! We had no idea sex is available to everyone"

From now on, life is rated AO which means anybody under the magical age of 18 is no longer allowed to have a life.

Re:When you have a game like that

[bedroll]

When you have a game that features things that the majority of people have always wanted to do at some time or another

I've always wanted to do a polygonal woman, they're just hard to find outside of gaming.

The biggest problem might not have been the sex.

[Captain Sarcastic]

The big problem wasn't that there was sex involved in GTA:SA. So you have ways of moving the pixels so that it looks like some guy is banging the hell out of some girl. Big deal.

The major problem was with the timeline:

1. Rockstar tells the MSRB, "Yeah, OK, we have some adult-themed material in this game, but that's why we figure an M-rating to be about right, because there's nothing explicit in the game."
2. Hot Coffee comes out, showing the sex, and Rockstar says "Those @#$%ing modders! They must have inserted that porn!"
3. Rockstar comes out and says, "Well, OK, the modders didn't insert the porn - it was already in there, but no fair drawing adverse inferences!"

It wasn't so much the sex, but the lies that got people up in arms about Rockstar. (No videotape this time, at least) We don't like being made to look like fools, and so the ESRB lowered the boom on GTA:SA.

I, on the other hand, am willing to throw brickbats all of the involved parties:

• Rockstar for lying about what content it did provide and for trying to blame the modders who exposed (pardon the expression) the hidden stuff;
• The ESRB for having such a skewed viewpoint about the difference between "M" and "AO"
• Above all, the parents who bought the game for Little Johnny and Janey who ignored the "M" rating and the criminal and violent subtext of the game, but were shocked, shocked! when sex reared its head.

A plague, not on one, not on both, but on all your houses!

Hurricane in a teacup

[AdamD1]

What baffles me the most is that M (for mature) is rated as being for customers "17 and older", while AO is for customers "18 and older." That's not a huge difference. One year. What does a 17 year old not know that an 18 year old is suddenly an expert at these days? Especially since I regularly get my ass handed to me by 16 years olds (or younger) on many online games, I fail to see how a rating system would make any sort of difference to a game like this. If I'm 16, I'll probably find the means to get this game one way or the other.

Also: there isn't any nudity in this game (not even, specifically, in the hot coffee segment where one would expect it.) It's quite obviously cartoonishly presented. I can understand the uproar over Manhunt, which is by comparison very detailed and brutally violent. But this is to my mind one of the most ridiculous "debacles" I've ever heard of. Anyone who assumes that a game named "Grand Theft Auto" is for teenagers is living in a fantasy world. Why it takes a sticker saying "AO" versus "M" to drive this home is beyond me. Does this mean I can make a game called "Assassinate The President" or "Serial Rapist" and expect the rating to determine whether Walmart will carry it or not?

And where are the freakin' parents? Out carjacking?

ad

Re:I'm really puzzled

[Rasta Prefect]

On the one hand, in the USA, you can easily buy a rifle or a machine-gun with ammunitions.

Uhhh...No. A rifle? Yes. A machine gun? You can get one, provided a clear criminal record, but it's not exactly easy.

So, this whole thing in summary

[mcc]

1. Anyone who previously thought that the ESRB was a good idea and defended it on the basis that if the industry self-regulated it would provide a bulwhark against censorship from outside has just been proven wrong.
   
   The ESRB has been demonstrated a tool for censorship from outside, as demonstrated by the fact that a game has just been effectively banned from sale in the U.S., by way of it being moved from M to AO, based on nothing but a targeted public smear campaign. The content even in the modded "AO" version of GTA:SA is significantly tamer than the sexual content that which is already present in a very large number of M games.
   
2. Anyone within the Hillary Clinton / etc "blame video games" camp who previously claimed that they just cared about protecting "the children" has just been shown to be lying.
   
   This has been demonstrated by their extended attack on a game that was already "mature, 17 or older only, not to be sold to minors" with a "strong sexual content" label, an attack which apparently only ended with the effective banning of the game. Apparently these people don't care about children, they just care about either political self-promotion or imposing their morality on others, and children are just a tool to achieve this.

Re:"True" Fallout

[themishkin]

I was going to buy this game in the end of August before college started up again. Instead, I'm going to go buy it today after work, not because I actually want the "Hot Coffee" mod, but I don't want a shitty version of the game. I have no idea how far Rockstar will go in "changing" the original release, and I prefer my games uncensored. As far as the AO stuff goes, I think the shower scene at the end of Tomb Raider 2 was much more enjoyable than this GTA:SA clip. (for those of you who finished the game without cheats) And, the graphics were about the same between these two games =D

AO should get the new content

[Fr05t]

Hell if I'm going to buy an AO game I better be getting what is promised on the box!

Next weeks headline : "Geek sues Rockstar for false claims of explicit sex in GTA".

Quote from the article "Steve purchased GTA:SA hoping to get a glimpse of naked women engaged in sexual acts, but instead found himself searching Rockstar's website for a 'patch'. Turns out Rockstar didn't live up to their promise of hot sex and coffee - the only way to get to that content is from a program made by some Swedish guy who doesn't even work for the game developer."

Re:When you have a game like that

[ipfwadm]

My favorite thing to do in GTAIII was sit up in the parking garage (that way the helicopters couldn't get you) and shoot people in the head with the sniper rifle. My roommate enjoyed doing that so much I eyed him suspiciously him when the DC sniper stuff started.

Double edged sword

[Iriel]

Glad it over. There, I said it too.

On one hand, I agree that this game was already intended for an audience far older than the children that lawmakers and soccer moms are trying to protect. However, with no forms of penalty to enforce the ratings on these games, nobody can expect them to follow. They're only mild suggestions without any kind of fine for selling to/buying for children under the age recommended by rating.

However, R* is also quite guilty of deliberatly hiding an easter egg in the game that (in America, anyway) dramatically changes some peoples' view on it. In a country where sex is almost strictly taboo, it was purposely sneaky of R* to put the Hot Coffee material into the game because we, as gamers and geeks, have already proven many years ago that if it can be cracked, it will. They can't just unhook the content and expect it to be done, and that's not what they did. R* left it in there for the people curious enough to find a way to get Hot Coffee.

I hope both of these parties can learn something from this. Ratings aren't effective without being enforced and unhooked content can and will always be found, cracked, and distributed on the internet within an hour.

I don't hate America

[robyannetta]

When will these jackass lawmakers learn that the only reason they're here -- is because of sex!!!

Re:I'm really puzzled

[operagost]

On the one hand, in the USA, you can easily buy a rifle or a machine-gun with ammunitions [sic].

Oh really? Try to do that in, say, the state of New Jersey. Let me know how you do. In fact, just try to buy any kind of "machine-gun" anywhere. I assume you mean a full-auto capable rifle. There's a federal statute which has made that very hard since the days of the Tommy-gun.

On the other hand, in more libertarian states like Pennsylvania you CAN easily buy a long gun (or even a handgun) in a shop and walk out with it. Problem is, there's this pesky computerized background check that's pretty well assured of finding your weapons-related assault conviction and denying the sale.

Why are we even paying attention to this?

[fahrvergnugen]

Fact: The developers at Rockstar thought that it might be fun to include a sex mini-game. Fact: This mini-game was built, but ultimately scrapped. Maybe this was because it pushed the game over the line with the ESRB, or maybe it's because the mini-game is not really funny and not very fun. Fact: There is no sex mini-game included in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas as shipped.

I repeat: There is no sex mini-game included in Grant Theft Auto: San Andreas as shipped. I've played the entire game, end to end, and while it does let me beat people down with a giant black dildo if I feel so inclined, the sex mini-game is just not in there.

That is not to say that the code for the sex mini-game is not on the DVD, but it is not in the game. This is an important distinction. If the mini-game is present on the DVD, but there is no way to access it while playing the game as shipped, then that sequence isn't really part of the game, any more than a deleted scene on a DVD is part of the movie.

It is common practice in software projects to strip out features as the release date approaches. Maybe the feature just doesn't work right, or it does work right but isn't really as good as everyone thought it would be, or maybe it introduces bugs, or maybe it pisses off media decency watchdogs. For whatever reason, features are disabled. This is usually done not by deleting the feature from the project entirely, but rather by deleting the calls that activate it. Deleting large chunks of code carries a huge risk in the later stages of software development, because it's easy to make a mistake that will break the build. If someone makes a mistake and deletes the wrong class file when they're taking out un-used code for something like, say, a sex mini-game that management has decided not to include in the final product, they could all too easily cause just such a problem.

Breaking the build is a Very Bad Thing, especially in gigantic projects like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, which cost $50 million to develop and employed hundreds of people. At the end of the software development cycle, new builds of the program are made every night. These are copied and sent out to teams of testers, sometimes hundreds of them, who run through the program and look for bugs. These bugs get fixed, a new build is made that night incorporating those bugfixes, and the cycle continues.

If the build is broken, nobody works. If the testers don't get a new build, then they can't find new bugs, because they're still running into the old ones. If the developers don't get a new build, they can't fix other bugs, because they don't know how their changes will interact with changes they've already made. Everyone winds up sitting idle, getting some sleep, talking to their significant others, and maybe realizing that working 20 hours a day for 7 days a week at substandard wages sucks. Maybe they begin to question their sexless and empty lives, and maybe they start chatting with each other about how a union would fix all this mess before their jobs are shipped off to China, and it's too late to do anything about it.

Morale suffers, the whole project slips, deadlines are missed, analysts revise your publisher's stock downwards, and you suddenly need a new job.

So instead of making a major change like deleting the entire mini-game, it's much safer to make a small change, like deleting the parts of code that start the mini-game. If there is no way to invoke certain parts of a program, then those parts may as well not exist. This is so common in software projects, both for business and entertainment programs, that the current controversy surrounding Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas seems from the perspective of the software world like a tempest in a teapot. Grand Theft Auto III had code for a half-completed fourth island on the DVD. Knights of the Old Republic II, which is notorious for its terrible and seemingly unfinished ending, had the voice acting and artwork for

Re:Why are we even paying attention to this?

[fonetik]

Another perfect example to prove this case is that there are pieces left from a skateboard that was going to be included. The icon can still be found for it, but they pulled the skateboard as a vehicle. (Read more about it here: http://www.gtasanandreas.net/weapons/) And there is even a mod to allow you to switch the shovel with the skateboard, but you still can't ride it. They didn't remove all of it because it may have caused problems to the build. They removed just enough so that you wouldn't notice it.

But I think all of us know that this is far more important than silly little things like the Downing St memo or Karl Rove and his crazy antics. After all, this affects children!

I hate to nitpick......

[fallen1]

but your statement is only partially correct. Yes, we can go out and buy a rifle fairly easily but Americans cannot go out and _legally_ buy a machine-gun (a fully automatic weapon) without a lot of background checks, a class III Federal Firearms License/permit (I believe I have the right one), and paying a fee per year to own said weapon. Plus, I believe with the license/permit it goes that if someone uses a machine-gun weapon in a crime in your area the police/FBI/etc can drop by your house and ask to check your weapon plus they have the ballistics on file as well. So the notion that Americans all own Uzis, M-16s, and other fully automatic weapons is highly overblown. Yes, there are a LOT of these style weapons in private citizens hands but according to FBI statistics, less than 1% of ALL privately-owned fully automatic weapons have ever been used in the comission of a crime. Please reread that - less than 1%. That means that 99% of the crimes that are committed with fully automatic weapons are done so with illegally obtained weapons. Hence my statement to everyone who talks about gun control and removing guns from private citizens hands - "When the police/FBI/etc. can make criminals follow the law, I'll consider giving up my gun. Until a criminal, who BY DEFINITION doesn't follow the law anyway, give up his guns I will not give up mine." I mean, why should I _not_ have the same degree of latitude to defend myself as the criminal has to attack me?

As far as the consensual sex in a video game, yeah, I think American prudish behavior is completely fucked - pun intended :)

Well once you mention the Web...

[snowwrestler]

You're talking about easy access to explicit content anyway. If a kid's going to go through all the trouble of finding, downloading, and implementing an easter egg patch or a mod, why wouldn't he just surf over to the BangBus for some XXX action and skip all the hard work?