Slashdot Mirror


San Andreas Banned In Australia

UoNTidal writes "The Sydney Morning Herald reports that following the revelation that the 'Hot Coffee' sex minigame was included in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, the Office of Film & Literature Classification has revoked the game's classification, making it illegal for the game to be sold in its current form in Australia. As the highest classification available [PDF link] for computer games is MA15+ (as opposed to R18+ for films that can be sold in all states and territories), the sex scenes in 'Hot Coffee' pushed the game outside the permitted content for that rating, effectively banning the game."

133 comments

  1. When games are outlawed... by TykeClone · · Score: 2, Funny

    Only outlaws will have games!

    --
    A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    1. Re:When games are outlawed... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      What an ironic post, considering Australia was more or less founded by a bunch of convicts.

      And what idiot comes up with a 15+ rating, anyway? So any game that a 20, 30, 40 or 50 year old gamer plays has to also be appropriate for a freshman in highschool?!

      Simple solution: Create an adult rating (17+ like in the states), print out a bunch of stickers with the new rating, retailers can slap them on their boxes of GTA. Duh.

    2. Re:When games are outlawed... by NMEismyNME · · Score: 1

      How dare you speak that way about the British!

  2. Anyone surprised? It's Australia by sgant · · Score: 1

    Over the past couple of years, whenever there is a story about censorship involving the net or games, chances are it was coming out of Australia.

    And I used to think the US was bad in these types of things. I'm sure the congressmen senators will be going to Australia now for censorship training camps. But who knows...

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    1. Re:Anyone surprised? It's Australia by Dioscorea · · Score: 3, Informative
      Over the past couple of years, whenever there is a story about censorship involving the net or games, chances are it was coming out of Australia.

      it is particularly ironic as prostitution is legal in Oz...

    2. Re:Anyone surprised? It's Australia by radish · · Score: 1

      By what definition is that ironic?

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    3. Re:Anyone surprised? It's Australia by Dioscorea · · Score: 1
      By what definition is that ironic?

      by Alanis Morrissette's. hth

    4. Re:Anyone surprised? It's Australia by maglor_83 · · Score: 1

      This is probably because there strictest rating for games here is 15+, and so if its not suitable for a 15 year old, its banned outright.

    5. Re:Anyone surprised? It's Australia by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1
      By what definition is that ironic?
      One form of irony is incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs.

      One might reasonably expect a country that frowned on selling sex in virtual form would also frown on selling it in actual form. Therefore it would be ironic that it doesn't.
      --
      Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  3. But... Outlaw What? by Uber+Banker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm consistently confused.

    Why is blowing people's heads off considered less serious than sex? I San Andres I could conduct a drive-by shooting, or otherwise brutally murder someone. But having sex results in an older age limit?

    Even if this is sex with a prostitute, or going several steps further if it is rape, then surely that remains less serious than murder, or mass murder.

    It is said that murderous video games don't make murderers (on the whole, for the millions that play). Is the assumption different for other crimes, if so is there any evidence, and if not why restrict them?

    It could be said that minors (however defined) shouldn't be exposed to sex (or sex in a violent context), but then why is it more OK for them to be exposed to murder? Does anyone have a rational argument either way?

    1. Re:But... Outlaw What? by amliebsch · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Does anyone have a rational argument either way?

      Some feminists believe that it leads to objectification of women that while not criminal or even evidenced by a particular act, indelibly colors a persons attitudes and treatment of women and increases the likelihood of prejudice or violence against women. The upshot is that even while you know it's just a game, and still believe that murder is bad, etc., it has a subconscious effect.

      Just as an example.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    2. Re:But... Outlaw What? by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      One could argue that rape "kills" a person longer -- that the victims never truely recover from it, and that it therefore causes, over time, a greater amount of harm.

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    3. Re:But... Outlaw What? by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One could argue that, I suppose...if one didn't mind being wrong.

      Death is rather permanent...its victims never 'recover' from it at all.

      If you're still alive, you still have the opportunity to try to move past your experience. When you're dead, that's it.

      --
      ____

      ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    4. Re:But... Outlaw What? by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      But that's just the point - if you're dead,it's over. If you're raped, the nightmare is just beginning. Perhaps I didn't express it clearly enough. My mistake.

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    5. Re:But... Outlaw What? by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

      When you're dead, you'll not experience any more happiness nor pain. When you're raped, you may experience happiness, and may overcome your pain. Forget it!

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    6. Re:But... Outlaw What? by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      Because a rape victim MAY experience happyness that person is better off? Guess what, maybe the dead man would have had nothing but bad luck and lived a shitty life of misery. Pointless hypothetics lead nowhere, buddy.

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    7. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Medgur · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I never quite could swallow this argument.
      It seems to me that following this line of thinking leads to classifying all sex in this manner, not just viewed. That having a person act in a semi-dominant role through physical sexual positioning results in the subconscious objectification of their partner.
      Even if this were true, so what? Is it so wrong to allow your subconscious desires to objectify the attractive traits of your partner? Hell, I _like_ to be objectified. I'm certain others do as well. It's flattering and uplifting to be found attractive. Though I do expect a reasonable level of respect during close interaction, casual sexual objectification is hardly offensive.

    8. Re:But... Outlaw What? by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      It's simple maths. But I won't bother explaining maths to someone who probably needs his toes to count to 17...

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    9. Re:But... Outlaw What? by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      Okay, then you'll understand this, Mr Math PhD 1 hour X Y amount of pain 10,000 hours X Z amount of pain Go ahead, prove to me dying hurts more than being raped does, over the course of a life. This will be hilarious.

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    10. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Txiasaeia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the other hand, looking at a rather brutal example, my wife's grandmother was raped when she was 11 or 12. Had she been insteaed killed, my mother-in-law, wife, and children would never have been born. Even though what she went through was terrible, I'm sure she'd agree that it would be worth it to see the smiling faces of her grand and great-grandchildren, especially if the alternative were death. I know that it's somewhat erroneous to try to prove a point with a single example, but IMHO being alive is infinitely better than being dead.

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    11. Re:But... Outlaw What? by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 1


      Because a rape victim MAY experience happyness that person is better off?

      Exactly. It is the possibility of happiness that makes life preferable to death.

      Guess what, maybe the dead man would have had nothing but bad luck and lived a shitty life of misery. Pointless hypothetics lead nowhere, buddy.

      Interesting how you claim that 'pointless hypothetics lead nowhere', immediately after using such a pointless hypothetic as your main argument...

      --
      ____

      ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    12. Re:But... Outlaw What? by saintp · · Score: 1
      Forget that, why is a poorly rendered, fully clothed comic sex game considered less serious than, say, any of the fucking porn on the Internet? Seriously! The difference is that someone actually has to spend the US$50 for the former, plus have an Internet connection and be a reasonably savvy user; for the latter, you just need to Google titties.

      You don't even need to bring the whole sex vs. violence debate into this. The fact is that GTA is a video game, so it must be evil, even if to unlock the sex scenes, you have to download and install a mod.

      Gah!! There's just so much stupidity in the world! No, I take that back. There's just so much stupidity in the government!

    13. Re:But... Outlaw What? by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      It's never been more amusing to reply to trolls:

      Death: 0 happiness minus 0 pain = 0
      Life after rape: >= 0 happiness minus >= 0 pain can be a positive number.

      Conclusion: Being raped can be better than being killed.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    14. Re:But... Outlaw What? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      You are just plain dumb.

      By your logic, death is preferrable to anything as long as the death is painless and instantaneous. Any other existence will reult in some pain which is larger than the instantaneous, painless death. Your life's value is not defined by the absence of pain.

      But keep arguing. Eventually you will spew out enough words that folks will get tired of arguing with you. Then you can declare victory.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    15. Re:But... Outlaw What? by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Well, at least I gained one idiot on my growing foe list...

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    16. Re:But... Outlaw What? by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather just skip all the effort and declare victory now.

      Victory is mine!

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    17. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why is blowing people's heads off considered less serious than sex?

      This particular news story isn't about that. The fact is, this game was certified without full knowledge of what was being certified. Now that it's come to light that there is stuff in there that the certification board didn't see, and that many people have a problem with, the current certification is no longer valid until the certification board has had the opportunity to review this content.

      As the law stands in various countries, it's illegal to sell something that's uncertified, or at least you need a special license to do so.

      It's likely that the certification board will take one look at the content and reinstate the certification, but until that happens (and you know how slow government organisations can act sometimes), the fact is that this game is uncertified and thus is restricted in how it can be sold.

      I agree that the general attitude of "violence is bad, but sex is worse" is ridiculous, but I'm not convinced that this is what the "ban" is all about.

    18. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 1

      Some feminists believe that it leads to objectification of women that while not criminal or even evidenced by a particular act, indelibly colors a persons attitudes and treatment of women and increases the likelihood of prejudice or violence against women.

      Except one of the parts of GTA:SA involves dressing in a gimp outfit so a dominant woman can have her way with you. If anything, that's the opposite of what feminists complain about.

    19. Re:But... Outlaw What? by hunterx11 · · Score: 1

      If this were true, wouldn't it just make sense for all rape victims to immediately commit suicide? I mean, if any suffering is worse than death, a person could reduce their suffering by committing suicide. I'm not saying that rape isn't incredibly heinous and destructive to people's lives, but you seem to be asserting that life is not worth living if one has been raped, which seems a bit ridiculous in most cases.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    20. Re:But... Outlaw What? by freidog · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking this might be more the preverbal straw that broke the camels back. There has always been outcry to the game play of GTA (at least in GTA3 and later), how horrific and violent and unseemly it is. And it is and that's what makes it fun, the ability to do and act as you want without worrying about consequences.
      This revelation that the developers hid sexually explicit content in the game just adds fuel to that fire. The backlash has as much to do with RockStar pushing the 'inappropriate' envelope with each new GTA game.

      Now I don't actually believe any of that. I think this is just a knee-jerk reaction by everyone who wants to censor life "for the good of the children" and for whatever reason sexual content is more an attention grabber than violence. Maybe it's just that violence is so prevalent in entertainment today we really have a hard time stirring up public outrage over it anymore. Turn on any drama on TV (broadcast, cable, pay, whatever) and you've got corpses, shootouts, fights, ect. Show a boobie and the FCC comes down on you like a ton of bricks (on broadcast TV anyway, basic cable it's more the ad revenue dries up).
      Same for language, cop shows have guys getting shot and killed every week, but if you really want to be racy like "The Shield" you'll say 'shit' during the shootout.
      It's just the values our society (here in the US anyway) has placed on different types of content. And those looking to censor everything THEY find offensive know how to capitalize on it. That's all we're seeing.

    21. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that's just the point - if you're dead,it's over. If you're raped, the nightmare is just beginning

      If you're a rape victim just "Turn that Frown Upside Down!" See how much better it feels? Next week you'll be telling rape jokes in your support group! Think of the men, they have needs too.

    22. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Uber+Banker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This particular news story isn't about that. The fact is, this game was certified without full knowledge of what was being certified.

      This news story is exactly about that. It is about something o extreme violence being 15 rated, yet something which contains sex, a less (if at all) violent act being 18 rated (hence unratable in Australia with the 15 limit mentioned in TFA).

      The point is exactly about why sex is considered more heinous/adult/restricted than extreme violence, else why would their placing in the rating system be changed/reversed.

    23. Re:But... Outlaw What? by The+Warlock · · Score: 1, Troll

      Austrailia censors their internet for porn, too. They're like fucking China over there, I'm not even kidding.

      --
      I've upped my standards, so up yours.
    24. Re:But... Outlaw What? by saintp · · Score: 1

      Oh, wow. I guess that puts a different face on it. In Soviet Australia,...

    25. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 1

      This news story is exactly about that. It is about something o extreme violence being 15 rated, yet something which contains sex, a less (if at all) violent act being 18 rated

      RTFA. All the classification board said was that they were forced to revoke the classification, and that without a classification, it couldn't be sold.

      The bit about not being able to certify a game as 18+ wasn't a quote, it doesn't say anywhere that the classification board's only option would have been to rate it as 18+, it doesn't say anywhere that the classification board isn't going to review the classification, and it doesn't say anywhere that the classification board can't reinstate the 15+ classification once they have reviewed it.

      The idea that it's 18+ content (in the eyes of the classification board) causing the ban is merely something the journalist implied. Haven't you ever seen journalists imply something that isn't true?

    26. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1

      RTFCs. Realise that the point of the discussion is not about the legal technicality of what the board can and can't do, rather why and for what end the system exists for. The point is that why classify the game as '18+ content' (or beyond as they had no classification' because it contains sex, yet not do it because it contains murderous violence. Did you miss it? If you state think to refer to the classification system for what actions mean what classification level you totally miss the point of what do classifications mean if sex is considered more adult than violence within the classification bounds or not.

    27. Re:But... Outlaw What? by ManoMarks · · Score: 1

      I know this argument, and I understand it. When someone is raped, it usually is the beginning of a long nightmare. On the other hand, the flip side of the argument is that any survivor of sexual assault is better off dead, which I think no feminist worth their salt would agree with. And it doesn't give much credit to the survivors. I know, often it feels like one would be better off, but life is still worth living.

      --

      That's gotta fit into your schema somewhere

    28. Re:But... Outlaw What? by ElleyKitten · · Score: 2, Informative

      >>> If you're raped, the nightmare is just beginning.

      What do you mean, "the nightmare is just beginning"? Being raped was the nightmare. Once it's over, it's over. I'm not saying it's all flowers and butterflies, but it's not death either, ok? I've known girls who've been raped, and they went on to lead normal lives. The idea that rape is worse then death is sexist and comes from a time when it was easier on society if rape victims just killed themselves. It's also an easy out for the guy if you believe that if she's not crazy or suicidal afterwards then she must not have been raped. Let go of your misconceptions.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    29. Re:But... Outlaw What? by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Why is blowing people's heads off considered less serious than sex? "

      How many people do you know that got pregnant in high school? How many people do you know from high school that were shot in the head or shot somebody in the head?

      It's more about perception than anything else. I'm not saying I agree that sexual content should be censored, but I can say that I'm far more worried about any kid of mine suffering negative consequences of sex than I am about them watching a violent video and killing people. It just feels a lot more likely to happen. Kids do stupid stuff with regards to having sex.

      That said, I don't think San Andreas is a worthy scapegoat, here. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that the sexual content in the game is a bigger hot button to me than the violent content, but I think these peoples fuses are too short to begin with.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    30. Re:But... Outlaw What? by metamatic · · Score: 1

      You underestimate the dumbness of the GTA controversy.

      The game already had sex in it. In fact, it had a mission where you rescued a prostitute from being raped and murdered by two Johns, and allowed you to have sex with bikini-clad hookers (with sound effects, steamed-up car windows and bouncing suspension), then kill them with a chainsaw.

      The game already had a strip club where you could get a private lap dance.

      Previous iterations of GTA had lesbian S&M.

      But suddenly there's a scene where two consenting adults have fully-clothed sex, and that is the thing everyone freaks out about. Stupid doesn't begin to describe this particular manufactured controversy.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    31. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Tink2000 · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you paid attention to the context of what's going on, Millie calls you "master" repeatedly, and if you enable the infamous "hot coffee" mod, you spank her, not the other way around.

      But hey...

    32. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Uber+Banker · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase your comment: How many people do you know that jaywalked in high school? How many people do you know from high school that got pregnant?

      It's more about perception than anything else. I'm not saying I agree that jay walking should be censored, but I can say that I'm far more worried about any kid of mine suffering negative consequences of jay walking than I am about them watching a video game and getting involved with wholly normal sexual behaviour of a teenager.. It just feels a lot more likely to happen. Kids do stupid stuff with regards to crossing roads.

      That said, I don't think San Andreas is a worthy scapegoat, here. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that jay walking as is an essential part of the game is a bigger hot button to me than the sexual content, but I think these peoples fuses are too short to begin with.

      The most toubling thing: I actually thing people are more against perceptions of encouraging jay walking than they are murder.

    33. Re:But... Outlaw What? by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "How many people do you know from high school that got pregnant?"

      5 come immediately to mind. I'm certain there were more. None, however, were murdered or charged with assault. I know there were also at least a couple of abortions.

      "It's more about perception than anything else. I'm not saying I agree that jay walking should be censored, but I can say that I'm far more worried about any kid of mine suffering negative consequences of jay walking than I am about them watching a video game and getting involved with wholly normal sexual behaviour of a teenager."

      I have similar feelings. However, there are those that hold the belief that kids will be innocent little angels so long as the idea of sex doesn't percolate into their heads. They have NFI that people are programmed to desire sex regardless of what's actually available or inspirational to them.

      BTW, jaywalking is a horrible horrible example, here. Heh.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    34. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Rayonic · · Score: 1
      "How many people do you know from high school that got pregnant?"

      5 come immediately to mind. I'm certain there were more. None, however, were murdered or charged with assault. I know there were also at least a couple of abortions.

      My public high school had a day-care center.

      Just thought I'd share.
    35. Re:But... Outlaw What? by westlake · · Score: 1
      Why is blowing people's heads off considered less serious than sex? I San Andres I could conduct a drive-by shooting, or otherwise brutally murder someone. But having sex results in an older age limit?

      The role-playing of gang violence, violence against women, violence against the police, in GTA: San Andreas appeals to a young male demographic and to no one else. The entire genre of games of which GTA has become the symbol is profoundly distrusted and despised outside the gaming community. You have to see this clearly: The knives were out for Rockstar and a pliant ESRB ratings board long before Hot Coffee.

      Rockstar made the ingenious and fatal argument that it was not responsible for a pornographic sex game which could only be unlocked through a trivial "third-party" mod. "Plausible Denial" is the operative phrase. It didn't work for Nixon and it didn't work for GTA: San Andreas.

    36. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting... however: objectification!=attraction

      Attraction goes; there's something about you that your partner finds interesting, enticing, exciting, and a whole bunch of other things that end in -ing. And the person being found attractive is _you_.

      Objectification goes; there's something about men/women's (delete as appropriate) bodies in general that your partner finds interesting. Yours are pretty much as good as anybody else's, so your partner is happy to f*** yours. Of course, anybody else with similar sexual characteristics would do just as well at this point, but you happen to be there at the time.

      To be found attractive is deeply personal and flattering. To be seen as a passable set of sexual characteristics is equal to the knowledge that you, the personality wearing those sexual characteristics, are essentially superfluous to the matter at hand; those inconvenient details can sod off as far as the partner in question is concerned. Generally, goes the argument, they're visualising someone else - usually someone with staples through his/her chest ;)

      This scenario I suspect is what feminists are referring to. You may indeed enjoy the sensation, you wouldn't be the first one, but it's reasonably easy to understand why it wouldn't be everybody's first choice.

    37. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Shihar · · Score: 1

      I agree that America is fucked up when it comes to censorship laws... but at the end of the day I realize that it could be worse. I could live in Australia.

    38. Re:But... Outlaw What? by RedWizzard · · Score: 1
      The fact is, this game was certified without full knowledge of what was being certified. Now that it's come to light that there is stuff in there that the certification board didn't see, and that many people have a problem with, the current certification is no longer valid until the certification board has had the opportunity to review this content.
      The certification board didn't see it because it's not a part of the game. And nobody else who doesn't want to see it will see it. So what's the problem? What are they certifying anyway - the game or the CD it comes on?
      It's likely that the certification board will take one look at the content and reinstate the certification, but until that happens (and you know how slow government organisations can act sometimes), the fact is that this game is uncertified and thus is restricted in how it can be sold.
      My understanding is that they have viewed content made accessible by the HotCoffee mod and decided it's not appropriate for a MA15+ certification. They will not review the certification again unless RockStar issue a modified version. That is extremely likely - Australia banned GTA3 due to the player being able to hire prostitutes to regain health and RockStar simply removed that part of the game and got it certified again.
    39. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 1

      The certification board didn't see it because it's not a part of the game.

      Yes, it is. It's a part of the game that is normally inaccessible, but it's still part of the game. When you buy the game, you get it.

      And nobody else who doesn't want to see it will see it. So what's the problem?

      The problem is that Australia decided years ago that you should be of a certain age to buy certain material. They set up a board to decide what material should be available to what ages. This board's judgement has been circumvented. Whether you and I think it's correct or not, the fact is that people can buy this game when the board hasn't deemed it suitable for them - which might be perfectly okay for the kids, but not okay for their parents. According to Australian law, the people who will see this illegally are not the people who can legally decide whether they should see it or not.

      What are they certifying anyway - the game or the CD it comes on?

      There is no practical difference as far as I can see. The material is on the CD, the CD, and therefore the material, is being sold.

      My understanding is that they have viewed content made accessible by the HotCoffee mod and decided it's not appropriate for a MA15+ certification. They will not review the certification again unless RockStar issue a modified version.

      Those are not claims that were made by TFA. Do you have another source?

    40. Re:But... Outlaw What? by UoNTidal · · Score: 1
      It was actually their review of the game that led to the classification being revoked, due to the inclusion of "contentious material" (their words, not mine) which wasn't disclosed when the game was orignally submitted for classification and which may have affected the original classification granted.

      It turns out that under the Classification Act publishers of games must disclose all contentious material included with the game, regardless of whether it requires codes or modification to access. If the classification board determines that the publisher failed to do this, then it must by law revoke the classification.

      As the game is now considered to have been Refused Classification by the OFLC, it cannot be legally sold, hired, advertised or exhibited. In addition, anyone who attempts to import the game from overseas could possibly have the game seized by Customs and face charges for importing prohibited material.

      As GTA:SA most likely would not have been granted a classification in its original form had the OFLC been aware of Hot Coffee (since depictions of sex are not allowed under the MA15+ classification) it probably won't be classified again until Rockstar produces a version without Hot Coffee on the disc.

      For more information (PDF links):
    41. Re:But... Outlaw What? by ameoba · · Score: 1

      This sounds like it's got about as much of a basis as saying that violence in games leaves us desensitized to real violence and more likely to commit violent acts.

      --
      my sig's at the bottom of the page.
    42. Re:But... Outlaw What? by RedWizzard · · Score: 1
      There is no practical difference as far as I can see. The material is on the CD, the CD, and therefore the material, is being sold.
      It's inaccessible without third party modification. It's not part of the game experience delivered to the user. I think the distinction between a mod that unlocks otherwise inaccessible content and a mod that adds new content is extremely dubious. The two cases are identical from the user's point of view. It makes no sense to treat them differently in terms of classification.
      My understanding is that they have viewed content made accessible by the HotCoffee mod and decided it's not appropriate for a MA15+ certification. They will not review the certification again unless RockStar issue a modified version.
      Those are not claims that were made by TFA. Do you have another source?
      Here's a longer article, also from the SMH.
    43. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 1

      I think the distinction between a mod that unlocks otherwise inaccessible content and a mod that adds new content is extremely dubious. The two cases are identical from the user's point of view. It makes no sense to treat them differently in terms of classification.

      I think it makes perfect sense. In one case, the content is being sold, in the other case, it is not. The law regulated what can be sold, so it would cover the case where the content is on the disc, but not the case where the content is obtained from another source.

      Here's a longer article, also from the SMH.

      Thanks, that's a lot clearer than the submitted article.

    44. Re:But... Outlaw What? by kraut · · Score: 1

      That would be a good argument to ban violence on TV and in Games. Showing consensual sex should surely be a positive thing, if you followed that argument.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    45. Re:But... Outlaw What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using your logic, we should shoot every person that has been raped, for their own good. Does that make any sense? I don't think so.

  4. wait, that doesnt make sense by Lanoitarus · · Score: 1

    Wasn't australia FOUNDED by outlaws?

    1. Re:wait, that doesnt make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yup. And New Zealand was founded by inlaws. I'm not sure which is worse.

    2. Re:wait, that doesnt make sense by Dioscorea · · Score: 2, Informative
      Wasn't australia FOUNDED by outlaws?

      Technically Oz was founded by Brits (just like the US), first as a penal colony when the prison ships anchored on the Thames started to stink up the London gentry's riverside properties. Later waves of immigration (mainly in Victoria) accompanied the Australian gold rush. Of course, long prior to this there was a wave of immigration during the melanesian expansion that led to the Aboriginal population.

      Anyways.... I personally am rather surprised that the Aussie government is complaining about GTA; after all, they have a fine tradition of road warrior fiction.

  5. Oh jesus christ, what's next? by Winterblink · · Score: 1

    What's next, Rockstar employees get put on no-fly lists, and are forced to walk around in public wearing special armbands?

    --
    "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
    -Hoban Washburn
    1. Re:Oh jesus christ, what's next? by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

      Point at which they'd just need some funny hats and a few fight songs..then it would get really interesting

      --
      I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
  6. Why stop there? by keyne9 · · Score: 1

    If this is the only requirement to ban/reclassify games, then anything modifiable (or hackable) can and should also be banned.

    If the content is in the product, but is not able to be accessed through "normal" means (read: non modification, either via patching or device such as PAR) then why is the product being rated based on said effectively disabled content?

    1. Re:Why stop there? by Linus+Torvaalds · · Score: 1

      Cue the crappy tetris clone that you can sell to kids, which everybody knows can be manipulated to display hardcore pornography.

      The fact that you have to modify it is irrelevant. The fact that the hidden content is tame compared with the bits of the game where you set people on fire etc is what is important.

    2. Re:Why stop there? by westlake · · Score: 1
      why is the product being rated based on said effectively disabled content?

      because hot coffee is not effectively disabled when it can be easily unlocked on three different platforms.

      because rockstar denied creating the sex game and became hopelessly entangled in this single, stupid, lie. its public relations offensive collapsing into mush.

  7. I know it's been said to death but... by alvinrod · · Score: 1, Redundant
    How does adding a poorly made sex mini game somehow magically change the game?

    Killing police, running over people in cars, drive-by shootings, massive gang wars, drugs, stealing cars, prostitution, hate crimes, explicit language, and everything else in the game are somehow appropriate.

    Consensual sex mini game that isn't very graphic or raunchy? BAN BAN BAN BAN!!!

    If you want to ban GTA:SA for the violence, drugs, and language that's fine by me. If all of a sudden sex is so wrong to be a bannable offense, I wonder how much longer Australia will have people in it? A little extreme, but still.

    I'm curious to know how Australians feel about this. Hopefully outraged and pissed off, because I know I would be.

    1. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by Wuukie · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear!

      By the way, if these jerks ever saw MTV, or your average hip-hop music video in any other music channel, I think they would die of heart attack. Maybe they're too busy attacking games to watch tv.

    2. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by (A)*(B)!0_- · · Score: 1
      "If you want to ban GTA:SA for the violence, drugs, and language that's fine by me."
      Why exactly is that fine with you? Banning a game for its content, regardless of what that content is, is bad for the rights of the citizens to freely express themselves. Let Rockstar peddle what they want [and make sure it is properly labelled by some sort of organization that is not affiliated with the government] and have the market sort it out.

      It's a little disturbing that you're in favor of banning games.

    3. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by NoSuchGuy · · Score: 0

      How does adding a poorly made sex mini game somehow magically change the game?

      Because it shows a nipple!
      Nipples are the third worst thing on this planet. Visual contact automatic morphs every boy/girl (age 8 or above) into a TeRRoRist.
      The second worst things are musilm terrorists.
      The worst thing is to challenge the authorities

      What I see from my perspective (good old Europe) is that there is a christian talibanisation of the USA.

      Need examples?
      - violence in TV is okay - 30 seconds of nipples leads to an outcry in the whole country. Call for boycotts of TV stations, companies and products
      - Evolution does not exist - the human race is made by a superior power with "intelligent design" (=God)
      - a liar, alcoholic and drug addicted person from Texas is forgiven because he is "born again christian"
      - Sex before marriage is evil - Why are there so much teenage pregnancies?
      - No condoms - condoms are evil because the make sex before marriage possible.
      - AIDS is a god send plague
      - A politican that does not belive in God and does not pray to God does not get voted.

      --
      Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
    4. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      San Andreas is now Sans Australias.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    5. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be american .....

    6. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by (A)*(B)!0_- · · Score: 1

      Wow - such broad generalizations and such oversimplification of issues. Your thoughts are really worthwhile.

    7. Re:I know it's been said to death but... by Larch · · Score: 2

      I am an Australian, but I moved before this happened. One of the many reasons I left is because of what I would describe as the political climate of the country.

      Frankly I don't like where the country is going and politically I seemed to be in a minority. There are other places in the world that seem to better fit what I feel is right. Like I said though, there are many other reasons I left.

      People have brought up the whole Adult game rating issue several times in Australia, but the Government has clearly indicated that they believe no adult in Australia actually plays video games, and therefore there is no need for adult games.

      There are worse things happening legally in Australia than this - I was certainly more pissed off about the so called free trade agreement than the potential to not play a few video games.

  8. So... by LordEd · · Score: 1

    assuming that MA15+ means 15 and older, does that mean that an Australian 15 yo kid is equally equipped to handle graphic violence as a 17 yo kid in the US?

    1. Re:So... by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Well, lets see: the legal age for sex here is 16, the legal age for violent video games is 15, yet we have a lower rate of teenage pregnancy and shooting fatalities than the US. Coincidence? Perhaps not...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  9. Government only gets in a man's way. by KingPrad · · Score: 1

    Like Robert Heinlein said: "government is 3/4 parasitic and the rest stupid fumbling". Just another instance of the really fucked up governments we've created and given power. More and more I think we should line all the politicians up and shoot them. Get me close enough to any of the bastards behind this and I'll spit in his face.

    Also, to anyone in Australia who needs GTA I'm sure you can find someone elsewhere who will mail it to you for the cost of the game + shipping. I'd be happy to. Or hit limewire, grab it, and send 40 bucks to Rockstar.

    I use to complain quietly, but I'm increasingly willing to be loud and obnoxious about it.

    --
    Stop the Slashdot Effect! Don't read the articles!
    1. Re:Government only gets in a man's way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "government is 3/4 parasitic and the rest stupid fumbling"

      I didn't know my ex had gone into politics :)

    2. Re:Government only gets in a man's way. by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you can find someone elsewhere who will mail it to you for the cost of the game + shipping.

      And there's the distinct posibility the Federal Police will turn up on your doorstep to make inquiries about importation of prohibited materials.

      Don't think its possible? People were arrested for importing "Lady Chatterly's Lover" in the '50s by mail, credit card records make the job just that much easier.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    3. Re:Government only gets in a man's way. by westlake · · Score: 1
      More and more I think we should line all the politicians up and shoot them. Get me close enough to any of the bastards behind this and I'll spit in his face.

      Get a grip. GTA began as a video game. If it has become something more to you, if you keep talking to strangers like a man about to go postal, then just maybe the other side has a point.

  10. Still trying by the_seal · · Score: 1

    We're still trying to get an adult games rating out here in convict-land. Australian Adult Gamers was the fore-front of an organised effort but it looks like the site has gone and I cannot find a replacement

  11. MMOG's by faloi · · Score: 1

    How would Australian politicians feel if they found out about the unseemly underbelly of MMOG's? Seriously, for a second, what's so different from poor Johny (protect the childrens!) applying a mod to a game and seeing content that's at the very least R-rated (haven't seen it m'self, dunno how bad it is) and poor Johny stumbling into someone's weird little chat in a MMOG? Or, forgetting games altogether, a chat room?

    --
    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
  12. There are more pornographic games by mindaktiviti · · Score: 1

    And GTA:SA never had that hot coffee mod turned on by default. It's the same as nude skins in The Sims s, which I assume is rated T for Teens.

    The Sims 2 should get banned in Australia too, and a whole other list of games I'm sure someone else would provide here.

    1. Re:There are more pornographic games by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Leisure Suit Larry 7 was banned here too. Oddly, the first six were perfectly acceptable it seems...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    2. Re:There are more pornographic games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were only 5 Leisure Suit Larry games made before Leisure Suit Larry 7.

  13. At least there is a written rating guide... by LordEd · · Score: 3, Informative

    At least there is a specified rating guide for content instead of an arbitrary one. According to Australian rating codes from TFA, the mini-game pushes it beyond the acceptable rating in the sex category. A mini-game is a little bit more than implied (although it is still modified in order to access the content).

    MA15+: The impact of material classified MA 15+ should be no higher than strong.

    THEMES: The treatment of strong themes should be justified by context.
    VIOLENCE: Violence should be justified by context. Sexual violence may be implied, if justified by context.
    SEX: Sexual activity may be implied.
    LANGUAGE: Strong coarse language may be used. Aggressive or very strong coarse language should be infrequent.
    DRUG USE: Drug use should be justified by context.
    NUDITY: Nudity should be justified by context.

    R18+: The impact of material classified R 18+ should not exceed high.
    THEMES: There are virtually no restrictions on the treatment of themes.
    VIOLENCE: Violence is permitted. Sexual violence may be implied, if justified by context.
    SEX: Sexual activity may be realistically simulated. The general rule is "simulation, yes - the real thing, no".
    LANGUAGE: There are virtually no restrictions on language.
    DRUG USE: Drug use is permitted.
    NUDITY: Nudity is permitted.

    1. Re:At least there is a written rating guide... by maglor_83 · · Score: 1

      It should be noted that a video game can't actually be rated R18+

    2. Re:At least there is a written rating guide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notice that in MA15+ sexual activity may only be implied. Even if we ignore the nude skins, which definately can't be included in classifying the game, hot coffee directly shows sexual activity. Sure the characters are fully clothed, but it is still showing sexual activity and the classification guidelines are quite clear that this pushes the game into R18+.

      The unfortunate thing here is that in Australia you can't have R18+ games, hence GTA gets banned, but the classification is completely in line with the rules and for the _unmodded_ game (remembering you can unlock it in the PS2 versions without downloading anything).

    3. Re:At least there is a written rating guide... by RedWizzard · · Score: 1
      At least there is a specified rating guide for content instead of an arbitrary one. According to Australian rating codes from TFA, the mini-game pushes it beyond the acceptable rating in the sex category. A mini-game is a little bit more than implied (although it is still modified in order to access the content).
      I agree the ratings code is much better. My problem with the whole re-rating exercise is that the game-experience, as delivered to the user has not changed: it does not include this mini-game. IMHO, it is the HotCoffee mod that should be rated AO (or banned in the case of Australia). Ratings should be based on what is an accessible part of the game, not what unaccessible code might be activated by third party patches.
    4. Re:At least there is a written rating guide... by moonbender · · Score: 1

      (remembering you can unlock it in the PS2 versions without downloading anything)

      Yes, by using third party memory modification tools (like, I think, GameShark). So you have to actually buy something instead of downloading it, the latter not being an option for the PS2. In the same way you can unlock the PC version without downloading anything, simply by using notepad. Neither thing is something anybody but an extremely small number of people will be able to do without external help. And in fact nobody did find out for the PS2 version until it was modified in the PC version (where vastly more powerful modding tools exist).

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  14. OSQ increased by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 0, Troll

    The Overall Stupidity Quotient of the world just reached a record level...

    Unbe-fucking-leavable...

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:OSQ increased by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unbe-fucking-leavable...
      Point taken

  15. TO MODERATORS: by Boing · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, there have been like fifty stories about Hot Coffee on Slashdot, and yet each time the same comments get modded up:
    1. Violence and crime are worse than consentual sex.
    2. The sex minigame wasn't even accessible without modification/it's very difficult to access it.
    3. Parents who bought a game called "Grand Theft Auto" for young kids shouldn't be able to yell at other people about irresponsibility.
    4. It's much easier to get real porn than to get this mod.
    5. All this is just politicians trying to gain support among the "think of the children" crowd.
    6. (this one doesn't apply so much to Australia) The difference between its old rating and its new rating is only one year of age.

    So moderators: I'm only half kidding when I say that these posts should be marked "Redundant", not insightful or interesting. Not anymore.

    1. Re:TO MODERATORS: by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

      Moderators cannot assume that other people have read the comments on other stories on San Andreas. As to the stories themselves being redundant, well this is one huge story, likely it will change the face of gaming forever.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    2. Re:TO MODERATORS: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying I should start posting about Natalie Portman, Soviet Russia, old Koreans, and Beowulf clusters instead? Consider it done!

  16. Bill Gates: "640K of memory should be enough...." by orthogonal · · Score: 1, Funny

    "As the highest classification available [PDF link] for computer games is MA15+ (as opposed to R18+ for films that can be sold in all states and territories), the sex scenes in 'Hot Coffee' pushed the game outside the permitted content for that rating, effectively banning the game."

    But but, but Bill Gates said "MA15+ ought to be high enough a rating for anybody"!

  17. That's it, the world is crazy... by rbarreira · · Score: 1

    A game being banned because of content which is disabled and requires installing a mod to enable it? I sincerely don't see why there should be any legal difference between the content being already on the CD and it being added by a mod (which isn't the case). But what do I know?

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  18. MOD PARENT REDUNDANT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    7. *whine whine* there was a story about this yesterday, and the same comments got modded up, *whine whine*

    Seriously, we heard that one before too. Geez, try being original for once. An amalgamation of crappy posts does not an insightful post make, but I'm sure the mods don't know that.

  19. Welcome to the Welfare State by benjamindees · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Assume that you're either a) government official or b) the elderly.

    What is the last thing you want to see? Of course, more mouths to feed. What do you want to see? Less mouths to feed.

    Thus we have legal abortions, outlawed sex, encouraged violent games, needless ground wars that can't be won, ipso facto, et cetera, et cetera...

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    1. Re:Welcome to the Welfare State by pynej · · Score: 1

      This is just population control

    2. Re:Welcome to the Welfare State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You are right. Welfare, and all other entitlement programs should be done away with. That way the government is not concerned with how many mouths there are to feed, and there will be no more wars as a result (+ all other problems you mentioned would b e eliminated).
      Survival of the fittest. If you can't make your own way, just go ahead and die.

      This is probably going to be modded as flamebait, but who cares. Parent is so overly liberal, that they don't seem to realize that some of their ideologies contradict others. Stupid fucktard needs to suck his own cock and go to hell.

      Thanks : )

    3. Re:Welcome to the Welfare State by hammeredpeon · · Score: 1
      i wanted to mod you, but i couldn't find a "stupid" modifier.

      how about we leave the crazy conspiracy theories at /dev/null, eh?

      --
      best college pickem site ever: pickem.terrbear.org
    4. Re:Welcome to the Welfare State by kraut · · Score: 1

      actually, if you are b) the elderly you should be encouraging people to have as many kids as possible. At the current birthrates, most western countries aren't going to have enough people to pay for pensions (or look after the aging population) in a few decades time.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
  20. Irony Personified by Deathlizard · · Score: 1

    Great. Now to get GTA in australia, your going to have to go to your local Mafia boss to get it for you.

    In fact, that could be a pretty good mini game for the next GTA.

  21. 'Banning Games'... Australian for Asinine. by imstanny · · Score: 0

    Are these the same people that said not watching commercials is illegal?

  22. Huh. by saintp · · Score: 1

    You know, it just occured to me that anyone savvy enough to download the Hot Coffee mod would also be savvy enough to download the whole damn game. So who have they stopped from seeing a poorly-rendered, fully-clothed comic sex game? Not a single goddamned person. They have, however, prevented plenty of innocent 17- to 26-year-old white males from knowing the sublime joy that is unloading two sawed-off shotguns into a cop.

  23. However by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Selling hardcore pornography in Australia is still perfectly legal, even in the form of a game, so long as it's name is not GTA: San Andreas.

    1. Re:However by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

      Hardcore porn (X rated) is only legal in Canberra, The highest allowed rating elsewhere being R which is explained elsewhere in this thread. MA 15+ is the highest rating for video games here, anything that doesn't make this rating is illegal to sell.

      --
      This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
    2. Re:However by ampathee · · Score: 1

      Offtopic, I know - ignore me.. however:

      A note on your sig there. I see the point you're making, and it's clever and funny (seriously :) - but kinda inaccurate. Try googling "you must reinstall windows", with quotes. I get 92 results. Also see this cut+paste from google:
      "Results 1 - 10 of about 34,700 from redhat.com for you must reinstall linux. (0.21 seconds)"

      So yeah, just thought I'd mention that :p

  24. DMCA by durtbag · · Score: 1

    I could be wrong, but wouldn't "modding" this game in order to unlock the Hot Coffee mission entale cracking the game? Wouldn't this be a violation of the DMCA here in the US? If so, then why doesn't Rockstar/Politicians just prosecute everyone who has unlocked this mission? Sure its hidden in the game, but if it takes an illegal act to access, why is Rockstar to blame? Silly political posturing....

    --
    itadakimasu
    1. Re:DMCA by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Actually, since Australia signed the Fair Trade Agreement with the US we have our very own DMCA, so the strategy could theoretically work here, too.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  25. Uh oh by Dormann · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if Australia knows about the vile sexual imagery I was able to unlock in Mario Paint?

  26. Good old Australia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm glad I don't live there. If any country is the first to ban or censor anything it's always good old Australia. Way to go guys.

    1. Re:Good old Australia by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 2, Informative

      If any country is the first to ban or censor anything it's always good old Australia.

      Not exactly everything, just anything to do with computers and sex. Its more technophobia and a mistaken belief that adults don't use computers (except at work) rather than prudishness.

      Hell, just last night there was an expose on streakers, and on the recent series of Big Brother any indication whether one of the girls was a natural blonde had been eliminated with a razor, not with pixellation...this is free to air television, mind you. They can even show penises after 9:30pm, if that's your thing (provided they're more than 45 degrees from horizontal...no really, that's the real classification guideline!).

      Another example, recently one TV station, the Special Broadcasting Service (specializes in non-English programming) ran an ad that went something like this: "SBS wishes to advise viewers that the coming season of movies contains adult themes, sex scenes, violence, horror, coarse language, drug use, and nudity. So there's something for everyone". Truly special...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    2. Re:Good old Australia by nathanh · · Score: 1
      Another example, recently one TV station, the Special Broadcasting Service (specializes in non-English programming) ran an ad that went something like this: "SBS wishes to advise viewers that the coming season of movies contains adult themes, sex scenes, violence, horror, coarse language, drug use, and nudity. So there's something for everyone". Truly special...

      Everybody in Australia already knows what I'm about to say...

      SBS gets the rights to show a lot of football - that's the proper football where the final scores are single digits - and in light of the frequent raunchy movies the acronym SBS is often described as Sex Before Soccer.

    3. Re:Good old Australia by SPY_jmr1 · · Score: 1

      While i'm sure i'll be modded into the depths of hell, i'm still saying it: I agree that Football can be exciting and fun to watch, but the best american football games are the closely matched ones where neither team can gain any ground, and the plays become weirder and weirder, and the final is 5-3.

      I'm just saying, you know? *g*

    4. Re:Good old Australia by GaryPatterson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can we assume you live in the "impeach the president because he got an illicit blowjob but don't worry about the current bozo launching a war based on lies and pushing the economy so far into the toilet that waste treatment plants will see it twelve months before any economists do" US of A?

      Or is it the "massive furore over a nipple shown on TV during a sports game that lead to huge penalties and red-faced hypocrites everywhere just about crapping their own pants in anger" US of A?

      Yes, in Australia we've banned guns without permits (that are hard to get) and some politicians have gone down the "porn is on the Internet therefore the Internet must be regulated here" path (and their attempts have been total and utter failures as anyone barely cognizant of technology could have told them before they wasted millions of tax dollars on their vote-buying furphies).

      Got any info on what we're banning first? Or is this just a knee-jerk reaction from an anonymous coward too gutless to bring their name to the table?

    5. Re:Good old Australia by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      5 is an incredibly high score for a football game. Check out the English league sometime.

      To be honest, for a moment when you wrote "American football" I thought you meant those padded pansies in the NFL, who have to wear helmets in case their hair might get messed up. What is the point of contact sports if they aren't the skimmer box on the gene pool...

      (That burning smell is my karma.)

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  27. ban? by cryptoz · · Score: 1

    I'm confused about the use of the word "ban". By the sounds of it, the game cannot legally be sold. But that doesn't mean it's banned. If you already have a copy, surely you're still allowed to run it?

    1. Re:ban? by metamatic · · Score: 1

      It's banned from sale. Apparently you're easily confused.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    2. Re:ban? by cryptoz · · Score: 1

      "San Andreas Banned In Australia"

      The title implies that the game itself is banned, not its sale. Yeeeesh.

    3. Re:ban? by metamatic · · Score: 1

      The game itself is banned--banned from sale, and probably from rental too. The title did not specify in what manner the game was banned.

      Concise OAD:

      ban 1 |ban|
      verb (banned, ban-ning) [trans.] (often be banned)
      officially or legally prohibit : he was banned from driving for a year | a proposal to ban all trade in ivory.

      So "...ban all trade in..." is in fact one of the examples Oxford gives for the primary definition of the word.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  28. I bet it has nothing to do with the Hot Coffee... by Tink2000 · · Score: 1

    And more to do with all the in-game jokes about the US-Austrailian War.

  29. Re:Yay freedom. by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

    We don't actually have freedom of speech laws here. It's generally more of a "Freedom of speech is good, as long as you're not pissing anyone off" kind of thing.

    --
    This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
  30. Difference between Hot Coffee and Nude Sims by tepples · · Score: 1

    It's the same as nude skins in The Sims

    No it isn't. As I understand it, the GTA:SA mod was essentially an Action Replay hack to unlock a door to a "Hot Coffee" room that already existed on the disc. The mod for The Sims, on the other hand, is user-created content.

  31. User-created content by tepples · · Score: 1

    Hacks in Mario Paint are more like the nude hacks for The Sims games than like the Hot Coffee hack for GTA:SA. There's a big legal difference between unlocking a door to a room that already existed (Hot Coffee) and adding completely user-created content to a game (Nude Sims, Mario Porn).

  32. Pro Tip: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HE WASNT BEING SERIOUS

  33. no sense + more illegal downloads by kicken18 · · Score: 0

    it clearly makes no sense when i can kill people...so wait..hey kids sex..whats that that doesnt exist but heres an m25 with m203 granade laucher..just for fun also i can see the amount of Bit Torrent traffic hitting the roof over in oz land

    --
    Visit My Blog at http://spaces.msn.com/members/chrisharries
    1. Re:no sense + more illegal downloads by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      What the FUCK did you just say?

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    2. Re:no sense + more illegal downloads by kicken18 · · Score: 0

      well seeing as i am not speaking, read it you can gather about out what i "just said" i was stating the fact that in GTA we can kill anyone we like in a manner of differt ways, the game can be released but then some sex scene comes out, which i class as somehting I would rather kids see then killing people (in the scheme of things) but it gets banned for a sex scene. so its kind of saying, shit sex bann it so the kids cant see, but it wasnt banned with just killing people so its like saying (although not to be taken too litrally) "sex..no that doesnt exist but here have a granade launcer and kill that gang member" as if that is ok where showing sex isnt I guessing you replied with "What the FUCK did you just say?" cos you thought i was saying something about sex and kids, i can sometimes be bad at explaining my self lol

      --
      Visit My Blog at http://spaces.msn.com/members/chrisharries
  34. Ridicolous by gullevek · · Score: 1

    I can just shake my head. sex in a game. Needs to be banned. Blowing heads of innocent bystanders, no problemo, go ahead.

    HOW stupid has the world become? Perhaps its time for some astroid wipeout. So that we again NEED sex to survive :)

    [btw, I just had sex and it was definitly better than holding and shooting any gun]

    --
    "Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
  35. Pro Tip #2: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jokes do not prohibit serious replies.

  36. Walmart shoppers by __int64 · · Score: 1

    I used to work at walmart during the gta3 release, apparently if I remember correctly, it was temporarily banned in the Au for lack of receiving a proper rating...That finally blew over, but not before seeding a myriad of roomers here in the states that gta3 was going to be banned and made illegal by the government. At least among typically joe sixpack walmart shoppers. I recall statements multiple times of the sort "Oh good you guys still have this yet, I need to get it before the ban" - or something to that effect.

    It's just sickening how grossly a misunderstanding these people have of free speech and it's effect on them. And how they were perfectly complacent and saw no wrong in what the government was "doing." - Gross

  37. As an American who lived in Australia.... by BulletMagnet · · Score: 1

    I lived in Australia in the late 90s and all I can say is what a load of hypocrisy....

    I remember after I moved there two distinct events. One was a television show which if I recall correctly was on the ABC (We Americans would call it PBS) was called "Sex Live" and I was stunned to see the level of graphic sexual content in this show. The 1st show I remember seeing was on how creative a woman could be with her "Map of Tasmania" - Muff to the Yanks - and all I remember thinking is "This wouldn't even pass Cinemax at 2am".

    The 2nd was the day after I arrived in Melbourne 2 local policemen were killed in the line of duty. The Australian press had this as a front page headline for nearly 2 weeks. As a transplanted New Yorker living in California, I recalled thinking "This would make the front page news for what, a day?"

    I own the PC version of GTA:SA and I can't think that anything I've seen in it so far would raise the hackles of Aussies aside from the violence. If they can show muff makeovers on their free-to-air TV, during a primetime slot no less, why on Earth would the stupid sexual mini-game in GTA:SA even BOTHER your typical Australian? Did Jack Thompson and Hillary Clinton start randomly ringing 011-61 numbers and get hold of John Howard or Kim Beazley? Frankly, the fact that there's as much cop killing in GTA:SA and the fact that it seemed all of Australia was in an uproar about these two cops getting shot I could understand the game being banned due to violence - but the sex?

    Granted, Aussies are subjected to alot of American TV and idealisms but most that I remember either looked at it as crap or weren't impressed. Funny how it turns that moralisms change upon which way the wind is blowing in North America.

    We Welcome Austraila into the union as the 51st state and will hence be renamed "South Hawaii". Please turn in all your stores of Vegemite and 4-20's for peanut butter and frozen burritos.

  38. I feel like playing it now by kwoff · · Score: 1

    I had actually stopped playing GTA:SA after only an hour or two because it just wasn't that interesting. I'd liked GTA3, even. Now that everyone's talking about the game, I strangely have an urge to reinstall it....