Slashdot Mirror


'Hot Coffee' Scandal Officially Resolved

kukyfrope writes "Take-Two Interactive today announced that the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) inquiry concerning hidden sexual content in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas has formally closed. All outstanding matters pending before the FTC have been settled and no penalties or fines have been assessed. Although Take-Two was not fined, the company will be subject to civil penalties of $11,000 for future violations. 'We look forward to putting this behind us and focusing on what we do best - creating videogames,' said Take-Two President and Chief Executive Officer Paul Eibeler."

189 comments

  1. Hot Coffee Dissolved... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Doesn't this game have enough cream and sugar as it? :P

    1. Re:Hot Coffee Dissolved... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cream curdles and sugar carmelizes.

  2. Problems like this are easily solved by krell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...when, if someone does not like what is in a game, they simply refuse to play it and move on (no screaming, no lawsuits, no complaints to the government).

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by LostCluster · · Score: 1, Informative

      This was a "truth-in-labeling" violation. Parents thought they knew what they were buying for their kids, and may have been okay with the violence but not the sexuality of the "hot coffee" scene.

    2. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by purrdeta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree but some people dont have anything better to do than complain. Also, I would say kids will gravitate towards that but that is the parents fault for not taking the game away or not buying it in the first place. In the end, it is the parents fault for not paying attention and then filing a lawsuit for their own mistake!

    3. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's fun to pretend that complex issues are black-and-white, too.

    4. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jason+Earl · · Score: 0, Troll

      The parents didn't file a lawsuit. The FTC did. They're the folks that prosecute companies that say one thing in their advertising and then do something else. Blaming parents for believing what Hot Coffee put on the label seems somewhat unfair to me. I bet that you would complain if the folks at Mars replaced the peanuts in your Snickers bar with dried cockroach larvae without changing the label.

      Long story short, people tend to complain when what the purchase doesn't match what the manufacturer put on the label.

    5. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 5, Insightful
      This was a "truth-in-labeling" violation. Parents thought they knew what they were buying for their kids, and may have been okay with the violence but not the sexuality of the "hot coffee" scene.
      Yes, killing hookers is fine for young'uns, but consensual sex? Corrupt their poor minds!

      Any kid who's not able to handle the hot coffee is too young to handle the rest of the game. Not to mention, they'll find more explicit porn just looking for the patch to unlock it.
      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    6. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by krell · · Score: 5, Funny

      " I bet that you would complain if the folks at Mars replaced the peanuts in your Snickers bar with dried cockroach larvae without changing the label"

      That's the type of analogy that assumes that the non-"Hot Coffee" content was wonderful and very different from the "Hot Coffee" content. How about an analogy where you buy a candy bar labelled "Loaded with Mouse Feces" and complain because you find a hamster-turd in it?

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    7. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by digitrev · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's true. And any child who's smart enough to unlock it on his own is probably smart enough to get access other porn.

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    8. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Parents thought they knew what they were buying for their kids, and may have been okay with the violence but not the sexuality of the "hot coffee" scene.

      From esrb.org:

      MATURE
      Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

      ADULTS ONLY
      Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.

      So, parents bought San Andreas for their 17-year-old kids, thinking it contained sexual content, but not graphic sexual content...? Or perhaps they bought it for their 12-year-old kids, not giving a damn what it contained as long as it shut the little sods up for a while? How many parents actually know what the little symbols on the game mean anyway?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    9. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's fun to pretend that complex issues are black-and-white, too.

      Kind of like how it's fun to pretend that obvious and simple issues are complex?

    10. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jason+Earl · · Score: 1

      That's actually an excellent point, and your point is made even more excellent by the fact that I had mis-remembered the facts in this particular case. I'd forgotten that in this case you needed a third-party mod to see the "nekkid people." My bad, someone please mod down my original post. You can't blame the original producer for something that a third-party did.

      My bad.

    11. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by krell · · Score: 1

      ...and someone else has pointed out that the supposedly-misleading rating that the game bore actually allowed for sexual content.

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    12. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Blaming parents for believing what Hot Coffee put on the label seems somewhat unfair to me. I bet that you would complain if the folks at Mars replaced the peanuts in your Snickers bar with dried cockroach larvae without changing the label.

      Actually, it's more like the folks at Mars replaced the proteins in the peanuts with a kind that could be converted to a toxin (not that pornography is toxic) and then the customer performed that conversion deliberately, then complained that their Snickers bar was toxic.

      Neither analogy really works, though.

      The simple fact is that anyone who is capable of performing this patch is capable of finding real hardcore porn. In my opinion, the law is not enough. There must be some consideration of what is or is not reasonable, and it simply is not reasonable to nail them for hot coffee.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by KDR_11k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How many parents actually know what the little symbols on the game mean anyway?

      Of course they know what those letters mean. They are review scores. Apparently out of 17 because why else would the children ask for games with a 17 and dismiss games with e.g. a 6?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    14. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 2, Funny
      I bet that you would complain if the folks at Mars replaced the peanuts in your Snickers bar with dried cockroach larvae without changing the label.

      Does this mean I should complain if I found real meat inside one of my favorite pickled sausage snacks?
    15. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Any kid who's not able to handle the hot coffee is too young to handle the rest of the game.

      So do we now look to you for all parenting guidance? Shouldn't we leave it up to the individual parents? Likely what you say is true but I know with my kids that I will use the parental rating information along with product reviews to determine what I think is appropriate for my own kids. As someone else has already pointed out, the problem isn't so much the content but that the content was inappropriately labeled.

    16. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by F_Scentura · · Score: 1

      "Actually, it's more like the folks at Mars replaced the proteins in the peanuts with a kind that could be converted to a toxin (not that pornography is toxic) and then the customer performed that conversion deliberately, then complained that their Snickers bar was toxic."

      Did any parents whose kids performed the mod actually complain? I'm pretty sure it was all conservative groups who wouldn't have bought the unChristian game to begin with?

    17. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It was labeled not for kids. A quick look at the rating's content descriptors will tell you that it's not for the squeamish. This isn't Wind Waker. This is one of the most mature games available in mainstream stores without hot coffee. As for hot coffee itself, it's a lame psuedo-porn scene where the guy leaves on his pants. If your kids have ever seen a rated R movie, and if they're playing rated M games they probably have, then they've seen more explicit "porn" than in this. If you allow them enough access to the internet to find the patch to enable it, then they've seen way more explicit porn.

      I just don't see why it was that big of a deal.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    18. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...when, if someone does not like what is in a game, they simply refuse to play it and move on (no screaming, no lawsuits, no complaints to the government).

      And for that matter, why is everyone giving Sony such a hard time? If you don't like their rootkit, just stop playing their CDs. Problem solved, right? So what if you already paid for it, and they didn't tell you that was on there, and you wouldn't have bought it if you knew that was on there, and in general you think they went too far this time and you think it is right to send them a _legal_ message so they don't do it again. What are you people, big-government-loving-pot-smoking-commie-hippie-na zi-types?

    19. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 1
      This was a "truth-in-labeling" violation. Parents thought they knew what they were buying for their kids, and may have been okay with the violence but not the sexuality of the "hot coffee" scene.
      Yes, killing hookers is fine for young'uns, but consensual sex? Corrupt their poor minds!

      I applaud you for completely changing the subject under debate. Truthful advertising is the same thing as killing hookers, right?

      But I suppose you would just shrugs your shoulders when you got sold a box that said it had a 40" HDTV in it and found that it had a 16" black-and-white beast.

    20. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, but I bet he would shrug if he got a perfect 40" HDTV that would turn into a 16" bnw beast if he went to the store, bought a patch and applied the patch to his tv. Because he could, you know, just not go to the store and not buy the patch and not apply it.

      You know what would be awesome? If you had to get a license before you were allowed to use anologies.

    21. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ScottLindner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're all right, but at the end of the day a parent needs to be able to make informed decisions to raise *their* child the way *they* want to and not leave the Internet to do it for them.

      --
      Slashdot.. where people join together in deliberate ignorance.
    22. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop changing the issue. Regardless of your view that porn is worse/better than violence, why can't we let the parents decided, based upon the labeling?

    23. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Ebola_Influenza · · Score: 2, Insightful

      some of us (parents) actually read and understand the symbols. it's definately the parents' stupidity to blame on this one...a little forethought, and this would never have been an issue. either sexual content is ok for your kids, or it's not.

      --
      "turning espresso into code..."
    24. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by lcohiomatty86 · · Score: 1

      underage people have always gotten their hands on cigarets and alcohol without the parents permission.. they have and will continue to get ahold of games their parents do not want them to play... this whole scandle is kind of rediculous.. considering how much actual porn one can fine in about 10 seconds online...

    25. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was wrong with the labeling?

    26. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because parents aren't deciding based on the labeling, they're deciding based on their child bitching and moaning and whining, and for (non-)parents who don't have the backbone to say "no" to their 8 year old, the only solution is to make sure games with themes they find objectionable (sex, violence, atheism, etc.) don't exist, because if they do exist, little Fucknugget Jr. is going to want it, and Mr and Ms Fucknugget just came home from a long day at work and don't want to be hassled.

      This is the same shit we see with television censorship. The V Chip has been in all TVs 13 inches or larger since 2000, why the fuck do i still hear shit about television content??? If you don't want to see certain types of content, fucking disable it!!! Then again, this may be too much to ask of the baby-boomer generation that can barely figure out how to get the 12:00 to stop blinking on the VCR.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    27. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by bonk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah. If I want to raise my kid to be a violent sociopathic gangster with no respect for human life or property, that should be my right. And I'll be DAMNED if someone tries to go behind my back and teach my kid that consensual sex with a female is acceptable.

      --
      I hope to die peacefully in my sleep like grandpa, not screaming like his passengers.
    28. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1
      I applaud you for completely changing the subject under debate. Truthful advertising is the same thing as killing hookers, right?
      Huh? I was comparing killing hookers in a game to a crappy porn-like minigame. I think the target audience for both is pretty much the same.

      But I suppose you would just shrugs your shoulders when you got sold a box that said it had a 40" HDTV in it and found that it had a 16" black-and-white beast.
      Uh, no. A better analogy would be if you were sold a 40" HDTV and actually got a 40" HDTV, but then you found an add-on for it that would make it download streaming porn from the internet. Maybe that's a plus, maybe that's a minus, but if you don't want the porn, don't install the add-on.
      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    29. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1

      Oh, I'm very much in support of games being labeled. However, this thing requires a patch to get to (or a gameshark code on ps2 I think) so people do not stumble upon it accidently. Even if it was accessible without the patch, while it should have been labeled correctly in the first place, it's adult content in an adult game. I don't think it should have caused all the fuss it did.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    30. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1
      You're all right, but at the end of the day a parent needs to be able to make informed decisions to raise *their* child the way *they* want to and not leave the Internet to do it for them.
      So why don't they just go and do that? How does fining Rockstar allow parents to monitor their kids on the internet?
      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    31. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by PDG1 · · Score: 1

      you're totally right, Mr. Earl.
      This is not the "'Hot Coffee' Scandal" that everyone says it is
      It was originally called the Hot Coffee mod...
      meaning that the kid actually had to go into the game and muck with the files thus exiting the Licence agreement that he made when his Grandma purchased the game and gave it to him

    32. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ehrichweiss · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You talk trash about liberals, some/most of which likely don't believe what you're implying that they do, and yet still have the nerve to act like someone else is trolling beside yourself. You ever stop to think that every goddamn one of us is a mixture of liberal/conservative, republican/democrat all in one, that we all have a wide variety of beliefs, that even some democrats are NRA members, that some republicans would like to balance the budget, etc...... unless we're really, really retarded?

      I know you're trolling, but to a certain extent it is your right to raise your children however you want. It certainly shouldn't be the government's job! Just don't try to tell a libby that.

      Nope, never crossed your, lack of, mind. Keep up the fight to make sure we're all ignorant and polarized against one another so we can be distracted from the real problems that do NOT involve political affiliations.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    33. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by PDG1 · · Score: 1

      exactly
      some people are missing the whole point of... Rockstar didn't do anything wrong.
      The content was there... access to it wasn't...
      You buy the game with a licence to play it the way it was made...
      Getting patches and Mods that change how the game is played... that's out of the hands of the publisher and the creator
      if I released a game for children... and put a bunch of voice clips of me swearing randomly... but I made it so that the clips could never be witnessed in the game
      but then some smarty pants who has nothing better to do than to mod little kid games made it so that every time the character jumped... it would play one of the swearing clips... at random... and called it Mr. Fluffy Bunny Tourette Syndrome mod
      could any one sue me if little children found this patch?
      according to Law... No...
      According to public demand... sure, why not...
      I make games... I should know better
      right?
      I rarely feel bad for a company.. infact... I've never felt bad for anything otehr than a person or animal in my whole life
      but I feel bad that Rockstar had to put up with this...

    34. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by fonetik · · Score: 4, Funny
      ...to raise *their* child the way *they* want to and not leave the Internet to do it for them."

      No one wants the internet to raise their child... that's what the TV is for.

    35. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by pboulang · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except people didn't actively go out and find a tool to intentionally install the rootkit, now did they? M for Mature says there may be sexual content. Hot Coffee was sexual content. What's the problem?

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

    36. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      There must be some consideration of what is or is not reasonable, and it simply is not reasonable to nail them for hot coffee.
      Tell that to McDonalds!
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    37. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ffft...you're just another asshole "conservative" pretending to hate both parties.

      "Libbies", as you call them, try to use the power of the government to make everyone "safe" (whether they want to be safe or not). They might trample on civil rights when they get overzealous, but in general they're motivated by compassion. By definition, they also tend to be a lot more tolerant about "alternative lifestyles", including the lifestyles of the same religious freaks who would be perfectly happy seeing all those tree-hugging, live-and-let-live "libbies" lying dead in a gutter.

      Conservatives want to use the power of the government to make everyone follow the "conservative" moral code. Said dumbass conservatives are completely willing to ignore said moral code when forcing it upon others, at same time denying with great indignation that they are complete and utter hypocrites. Not uncommon to find these assholes telling everyone else what "correct behavior" is, while covering up their drug use, having out-of-marriage affairs, and advocating the death of anyone whose beliefs they disagree with (while claiming to be for "life").

      Pretending to hate both parties while espousing the ideals of one of them fits that party's behavior pattern quite well. Guess which category it sounds like YOU belong to.

    38. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by andrew_mike · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This was a "truth-in-labeling" violation. Parents thought they knew what they were buying for their kids, and may have been okay with the violence but not the sexuality of the "hot coffee" scene.

      I call BS. Said content wasn't even part of the game, and should not have been considered. Even so, GTA is sufficiently notorious that parents should've known what they were getting their kids into. If they didn't, the giant "M" on the cover was a not-so-subtle hint that this game may not be appropriate for Little Suzie. With current corporate policy, the parents have to buy the games.

      Any parent that buys their child this game and then sues for being incensed by the game's contents is guilty of being a bad parent.

      --
      Being a smartass is a much better thing than being the alternative.
    39. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jason+Earl · · Score: 1

      Clearly I need to do my research before posting about video games that I don't play. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Seriously, you were relatively nice to me even when my post was completely clueless.

    40. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly. If people want to know how liberals truly think, look no further than 1890-1920, the progressive era.

      Yeah, there was stupid shit, like Prohibition that was the last gasp of the movement as it died. But, actually, Prohibition has an interesting story.

      What people don't realize is that prohibition wasn't intended to protect people from themselves, it was intended to prevent a common problem in those days: Men who wouldn't support their families, spend all their money on drink, and absure their wives. And women couldn't get a divorce and they couldn't get a job and there was no child support even if they could.

      So it was, mistakenly, thought that banning alcohol would get rid of alcoholic and abusive husbands. Yes, it was stupid, but it wasn't the puritanic motives people think, it was fighting a real problem with a somewhat naive solution. And, yes, liberals fixed that problem later, in other ways.

      Most of the 'liberal', or 'enlightenment' solutions have good motives. Sometimes they are stupid, but the motives are usually good.

      OTOH, so were most conservative motives, at least until the neocons got ahold of them. And the neocons, least we forget, were a bunch of liberals who got, basically, really fascist in the 70s with the idea of 'improving' the entire fucking world, instead of just the US, and switched parties because the liberals said 'hell no'. They said 'Hey, let's coop the religious right' and tada.

      Consider that the next time you look at the borrow-and-spend 'conservatives' running the government. They do that because they aren't 'conservatives', they're fucking discredited-by-the-left 'liberals' who've decided to go 'progressive' on the whole fucking world, and found, like Prohibition, you can't just dictate things and have them happen.

      There's a theory around that every other country's center is this country's left, but, at least in foreign policy, that theory is exactly wrong. Our foreign policy is way to the left of where current liberals stand, to the point where our government can fix every country in the world with the right law(s). The is the Enlightenment on Steroids, it is 'progressive', extremely so, way past any sane point. This is why our internal and foreign polices seem completely out of joint with each other at times.

      I keep waiting for someone to stand up on TV and say 'Hey, isn't starting a war not a conservative position to take?'.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    41. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, killing hookers is fine for young'uns, but consensual sex? Corrupt their poor minds!

      I'm aware that most of SlashDot dismisses this possibility without even thinking about it, but why is this not the case? Real teenagers have seen lots of action movies. They already have a perspective on violence which is hopefully molded by their parents. So maybe a parent would think that a game which involved killing hookers is okay (for older kids, obviously) and they're sure that their kids are not taking it too seriously, and because they've taught their kids that violence in real life is not okay, and so on.

      Now, as for explicit sex... maybe those same parents think their kids aren't ready for that yet, especially in the context of so much violence. Teenagers know a lot about sex, sure, but the parents are still molding their attitudes towards it. It's not just the "birds and bees" talk at age twelve and that's it! Maybe they start letting the kid see R-rated movies (with the parents, of course). Maybe once the kid has been in a relationship for a while they have a longer talk about sex. Obviously kids learn many things from their friends, but the parents still have a lot to do with teaching their kids about sex. And it's something that they're still doing long after they've taught their kids about violence. So yes, maybe those parents don't want their kids to be exposed to too much sexual explicitness at that age.

      Any kid who's not able to handle the hot coffee is too young to handle the rest of the game. Not to mention, they'll find more explicit porn just looking for the patch to unlock it.

      Of course, I'm talking about responsible parents, not the kind whose 14-year-old has free reign on the Internet and is going around hunting for porn or meeting "nice young men" on MySpace or that sort of thing ...

    42. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the game clearly has "Strong Sexual Content" listed with the other reasons it is for _mature_ audiences only. It was labeled, well. Parents shouldn't be blaming the game company for something that is more about watching your kids on the internet (to unlock it, where they could also just visit a porn site), than the fact that is was inaccessable on the game disc.

    43. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry your wrong about neocon being liberal there not they want to control the world not make it better. Liberal as a whole want nothing to do with war at all so i dont know how you make the assumption that are foriegn policy is some how more left then the rest of the world.

    44. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, except people didn't actively go out and find a tool to intentionally install the rootkit, now did they? M for Mature says there may be sexual content. Hot Coffee was sexual content. What's the problem?

      Wow, you really think parents are stupid, don't you? Not too many parents will be bothered by the PG-13 (or, seriously, PG) sound effects in the normal game (and yes, parents do hear about this sort of thing -- from other parents, or maybe the occasional newspaper article which mentions the game, or god forbid they might even be gamers themselves). Considering all of the violence, most parents probably just figure that's why it got an "M" (which is a correct assumption, not counting the minigame). Besides, seriously, most parents let their older kids see the occasional R-rated movie (since the ages line up, I'm thinking that most parents associate "M for Mature" with "R"). San Andreas, as advertised, doesn't seem any worse than an R-rated action movie, and lots of parents let their kids see those (or did back when Hollywood used to make them).

      On the other hand, as silly as the "Hot Coffee" sex game is, it's basically an X-rated scene with audience participation, and it earned the game an AO rating. That's not what the parent buying or renting the game has approved of.

      You also seem to think that kids are pretty stupid. Yes, the kid playing the game does need to figure out how to unlock the minigame, but you know, teenagers tend to be good at that sort of thing. Their friends will tell them about it, then they'll look it up on Google, then they'll do what they want. The fact that you have to hack the game to play the minigame doesn't mean much. That's like hiding your car keys when you go out of town instead of taking them with you.

      Anyway, the basic problem with "Hot Coffee" is that it was there at all. It was something unexpected on the disc, something which, if most parents knew about it, might well prevent them from buying/renting the game. That's the point -- it was an unpleasant surprise and not something that many parents wanted, just like the Sony Rootkit.

      You know, this whole issue is not really even about parenting, it's about giving people control over the stuff they buy. If I buy X, I want X, not X with the following restrictions, not X with some extra crap I don't want, not X but you have to do this and that or it'll stop working and they don't tell you about that in the store, just X. You want to buy something, and you expect it to do what you want it to do and not cause any problems. What if I bought this game for myself and now I figure I have to hide it when some of the older kids in the neighborhood come by or when the babysitter is here? That's just really annoying!

    45. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not a republican so don't even go there with your My Team vs Your Team hate fest stupidity. I hate both of the mega parties. Just keep up the polar fighthing... idiot.

      Bullshit. You're just another conservatard asswipe pretending to be a centerist. You fool no one. Idiot.

    46. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      I haven't let my kids play that sort of game, even though my son has heard about it from his friends and has wanted it. Heck, we bought the PS2 off of his friend who was moving out of the US and back to Denmark and they threw in the game. We politely declined on the GTA game and they sold it along with everything else they were getting rid of.

      I personally don't see the content as being a "big deal" because as you have indicated, the game is already for a mature audience. The problem I do have is the mislabelling of it. Labels might be the only thing a parent checks before they decide on letting their children view it. I'm not saying that it's the right approach in my opinion, but not all parents will take time to research a product to see if it fits into their parenting approach. Example: My daughter went to a birthday party with her friend (just turned 10) and she went to the POTC - Dead Man's Chest movie. A few girls that went to the party though weren't allowed to go to the movie because the parents thought it was too violent and they wanted to keep their kids "innocent" they said. That is their right as parents and they probably based it on feedback and the rating of the movie. Having seen the movie, I don't think there was anything "bad" in the movie but again, it's my opinion and I think my kids can handle it. The point is though that the rating is just one of the tools that parents will use to assist in raising their kids.

      late night post...errors likely

    47. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      I hadn't seen the labeling on the game myself. I guess I assumed by all the talk here that it only listed violence. Does the rating system go beyond the "M" (mature) rating or is it just the sub-labeling of why it received the "M" rating that would include "sexual content"?

    48. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      I agree that some parents buy the game because of their kids "whining" about buying the game. One of my son's friends (not the one I described moving in a later post) pretty much did that with his parents and they seemed content to give into his tears. Then again, this is the same family that let their oldest son drop out of school and pretty much drive the parents to splitting up trying to figure out what's wrong with him. It really comes down to not giving in to the whining of the kids. You have to be the parent first, not the "friend". It's great when the two coinicide but it won't always be that way.

      As for the V Chip, to be honest, it's not something that I recall seeing on my TV set. I just haven't had to look for it. On the other hand, the only TVs we have are in the living room and the kitchen and both are visible by my wife or me. Same with the computer...it's in the living room and we can easily check to see what they are doing on it. They both know that they should only go to sites that we've talked about. If they want to search for another site, we'll sit with them while they do it. I'm not saying that my kids don't know about the "other" sites but they know we don't approve of them viewing them (same thing with swearing...they know the words, just don't use them). They are both old enough and mature enough to have had some of the conversations that parents eventually have with their kids. The ratings at the start of TV shows certainly helps parents determine if they want to let their kids view the content. I don't care myself what the content really is, I just want to know before I let my kids watch it. I guess the V Chip could help but it's probably not perfect technology either. A mislabeling of the content will still get around it, right?

    49. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by cgadd · · Score: 1
      The problem I do have is the mislabelling of it. Labels might be the only thing a parent checks before they decide on letting their children view it.


      GTA was already rated "Mature" even without the Hot Coffee content. As others have pointed out, the game already involved killing, drugs, unseen but pretty obvious sex with hookers, etc.

    50. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Spokehedz · · Score: 1
      You're all right, but at the end of the day a parent needs to be able to make informed decisions to raise *their* child the way *they* want to and not leave the Internet to do it for them.


      I would agree with you, except for the little nagging fact that your trusting a body of people to do the 'judging' for you. Meaning, the rating on the outside of the box. Your trusting some other people to decide what your child is ready to see or not.

      So basically your saying, "Ok. The ESRB says that this game is Mature. Therefore I'm going to let my children play this game, knowing full well that the raiting is for 'Mature' individuals." ('Mature' means above 18 in most parts of the USA. If they were this age, they could buy it for themselves at the store.)

      Sometime later...

      "WHAT'S THIS?!? SEX IN A MATURE VIDEOGAME?!? Why, I would have raited this game ADULTS ONLY! Not Mature!"

      So there's your answer: You are trusting someone else to rate the games, and then you complain about how they rate them versus yourself. It's your own fault. You should be watching your kids play the games, or trust the raiting system. You can't have it both ways.

      This is of course, glossing over the fact that this 'content' was not aviable in the game through any accessable means. You had to download a patch, apply it, reburn the game, and put it into your PS2. The computer version was only slightly less complicated, but its almost the same.

      So your unhappy that a previously inaccessable area of the game--that the devolopers left in by simply forgetting that it existed in the first place--was a bit where some pixelated bump'n and grind'n was going on? I'm sorry--you gave up your right to complain about this the minute you let your CHILD play a MATURE game. You either explicitly trust someone else to judge if content is acceptable for your kid, or you don't. You can't say your okay with it one minute, and then get mad when lateron when you wern't paying attention it is not what you would have judged it.

      Just like with TV. If you see a boobie on the TV, you just calmly explain that wasen't supposed to happen unless she was breastfeeding her child.

      Done. No muss, no fuss. You take away the "No, this is bad--never do this ever." and the child loses all interest in doing/seeing said activity/picture/whatever.
    51. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Well that's not the sort of reply I was expecting. (I was expecting an entirely different sort of incoherent reply.)

      However, there are roughly two ways of looking at a problem in politics. You can either try to change it through law, or you can not try to change it through law. The first is called 'liberal', and the second 'conservative'.

      Now, there are some problems that everyone agrees the laws should attempt to fix, such as murder. And there are problems everyone agrees the law shouldn't, such as a burnt-out lightbulb in your bathroom. In addition, there are many 'problems' that many people do not agree are actually problems, and even some things where one side sees a problem and a solution, and the other side thinks the solution is the problem and the problem is the solution, like abortion.

      So, this doesn't exactly match up to the (supposed) left and right in this country, but it is, in theory, where they are coming from. The left 'progresses' and the right 'resists adding government solutions'.

      This is now wrong. The left is still in the same place it always is.

      However, the right has been taken over by two offshoots of the left, or, at least, two 'progressive' groups who want to use the government to solve problems. The theocons and the neocons. The theocons want to solve the problem that a lot of people aren't their particular brand of Christian, and are even gay.(1) The neocons want to solve the problem that the world does not operate how we want it to.

      I.e., the 'right' is trying to solve problems. In fact, they're trying to solve more problems than the left right now.

      The actual left in this country rejected these theories because they don't see those 'problems' as, you know, actual problems. And, as is what generally happens when the government 'solves' problems that stem from incorrect assumptions, like the neocons, or just don't fucking exist at all, like the theocons, they have completely and utterly screwed it up. (The right isn't alone here. The drug prohibition and gun control are both total cockups becuase they solved problems that didn't exist, or at least solved real problems the wrong way.)

      And none of this would fucking matter if the right hadn't made 'liberal' out to be a bad word. Our government was one of the most enlightened and liberal governments in the world at the time of its founding. In fact, almost every government on this planet is either extremely liberal compared to 500 years ago, or a dictatorship shithole like North Korea. For that little doublespeak alone the current 'right' needs to burn in hell.

      1) Before some fucktard leaps in about how they're just protecting us from 'activist judges', that doesn't matter. If you are trying to solve a problem using the government, you are operating in a liberal universe. It doesn't matter how you try to solve it. If you were actually just attempting to correct some flaw in the government, maybe, but the sole, and stated, aim, seems to be to condemn homosexuality via the government, and the government making moral judgements is a liberal concept.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    52. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ragefan · · Score: 1
      MATURE
      Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

      ADULTS ONLY
      Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.

      I *love* the difference between these two ratings. Because it's so amazing how much maturity a 17 yr old gains on her 18th birthday. As though watching sexual content the day (week, or month) before one's 18th birthday will irreversably scar them.

    53. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by JunkmanUK · · Score: 1

      it's a good point.

      I've been amazed for a long time that you can walk into a newsagents and see magazines displaying women in their full glory with *tiny* spots over the nipples to fall in line with censorship law (in the UK). The same with television adverts and non 'porno' magazines. There is a very strange attitude to the human body amongst censors where you are entitled to see everything except a 1/4 inch square patch.

      Anyway how this fits into the hot coffee scandal is that there is a very big divide enforced between 'strong sexual content' and 'graphic sexual content' when the end result, that they're trying to protect against, is pretty much the same. Take the actual context of the game.

      strong sexual content => hearing moaning sounds, watching a car rocking back and forward
      graphic sexual content => seeing a guy with his pants on dry humping a topless (or nude - can't remember..?!) woman

      I don't know about you but in this case I can see worse 'graphic sexual content' turning the TV on after 9pm. More to the point - both are capable of promoting sexual interest and arousal so where the 'young 'uns' are concerned you're still feeding their little imaginations with sexual thoughts. Unless of course they live in a staunch Christian TV free house - in which case how come they're playing a violent game anyway?

      So that's my two cents. Really the problem is that the 'adults only' really rating doesn't give any more warning to the buyer than the mature rating. In the UK we have an 18 rating which pretty much covers everything - note that this scandal only manifested itself in the US. The UK ratings already covered any 'extras'. Of course there's the 'R18' rating but that tends to just be for crap porno videos (but even then - restricted 18? Like an eighteen year old is going to pick up a movie called 'bang sluts of sinsville' and put it back hastily - "Oh, 'restricted' 18 - better not go near that then".

    54. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by leenks · · Score: 1

      And the mislabelling of the ratings at the start of the show isn't going to get around you until the children have seen the first sex or violent scene, by which point it is probably too late?

    55. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      But that's one of the reasons labelling should be accurate. Why is it so hard to expect the rating system to be accurate? I use the ratings now as the start point to decide if it's appropriate but I certainly don't stop there. Reading reviews is probably the more helpful info in most cases. Fortunately as my kids get older, I think they are getting ready for most of the content out there but I don't want them growing up too fast with things they shouldn't have to handle yet.

      I've responded to comments on this topic in the past and it's almost like parents can't win. If they protect their kids from certain content, they're over protective in a lot of people's opinion. Some people dislike rating systems and think it's to big a burden on the vendors to comply. I wonder if these are the same people wondering why so many kids/young adults are messed (violence, drugs, etc...) up.

    56. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      I did comment a couple post up earlier that I hadn't actually seen the rating label for the game. The games reputation was already enough for me to not consider it for my kids. I was under the impression that the game was labelled incorrectly but I have been corrected that it is a stretch to say it wasn't labelled for sexual content.

    57. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by multisync · · Score: 1

      Actually, the mod unlocked content that was already in the game but inaccessable.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    58. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by PDG1 · · Score: 1

      well... that's still mucking with the files if you ask me...

      it's only one file but even then... it's not part of the licence you buy

      although he had to change only one bit to view the content, It's still modifying the files... and also making any complaints about something he did to the game... it's just...

      so very frustrating :(

    59. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by pboulang · · Score: 1
      It wasn't "included" with the game. There was NO code distributed or sold or given away that did the unlocking. I suggest that it was in the game originally, then REMOVED since the creators decided that they wanted an M over an AO title. The removal process was to make it INACCESSIBLE via gameplay.

      If your babysitter can masturbate with your hardbrush, do you need to hide it whenever she comes over? Hey, we should SUE the manufacturer, because NOWHERE on the box does it say that this item can be used as a fucking dildo!

      But yes, I think parents are stupid if the complain about something that clearly is indicated as for 17+ and has material that is clearly less than the equivalent NC-17 movie rating. I think parents that would buy a game and not be involved with their kids are also stupid, but hey, I can see a lot of room in this complaint. OMG, I give my kids uncontrolled access to the internet and they saw dry humping in a game!

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

    60. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1

      On the back of every game there are "content descriptors" to explain a little better what's in the game. GTA:San Andreas's (the M version) are:
      Blood and Gore
      Intense Violence
      Strong Language
      Strong Sexual Content
      Use of Drugs

      I think after reading that, the hot coffee scene wouldn't seem too out of line, even if it could be stumbled upon without installing a patch.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    61. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1
      Now, as for explicit sex... maybe those same parents think their kids aren't ready for that yet, especially in the context of so much violence.
      I can understand that. But, in the game (without hot coffee), you can have sex with hookers, and then kill them for your money back. I think that might hurt their developing concepts of healthy sexuality. Also, the game lists "Strong Sexual Content" in the content description on the back. Wouldn't that raise a warning flag to a parent who is concerned about games having too much sex?

      Of course, I'm talking about responsible parents, not the kind whose 14-year-old has free reign on the Internet and is going around hunting for porn or meeting "nice young men" on MySpace or that sort of thing ...
      But, if they don't have free reign on the internet, enough not to be able to find porn, couldn't the parents also prevent them from downloading the patch?
      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    62. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by greggman · · Score: 1

      Ummm, the game says and has always said right on the box, rated M for Mature, 17+, "Strong Sexual Content"

      http://games.greggman.com/edit/editheadlines/2005- 07-28.htm

      I don't see how parents didn't have enough info in the first place

    63. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      ICEBURN. You so should have put your name to this. This is brilliance.

    64. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by palutke · · Score: 1

      . . . little Fucknugget Jr. is . . .

      Thank you, you just provided me with a name for my first child!

      --
      'I ain't a liar, baby, and I ain't proud I just want what I'm not allowed.' -- Violent Femmes, 36-24-36
    65. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      There must be some consideration of what is or is not reasonable, and it simply is not reasonable to nail them for hot coffee.
      Tell that to McDonalds!

      I think I'm going to have to coin a new name, it will be called drink's law, and it will read something to the effect that "no matter what the conversation, someone will say something stupid in it if it's on slashdot." The McDonald's jokes would be a lot funnier if McDonald's wasn't clearly culpable for the woman's burns due to the fact that they were selling the coffee at a temperature not only higher than the standard, but at a temperature that would cause the cup to deform like it was made out of tissue paper.

      I'm sure you were just trying to be funny, but you failed.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    66. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever it is, get over it already. You self important little colon ferret.

    67. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

      Bravo. You're good at this polar fighting thing....troll.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    68. Re:Problems like this are easily solved by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      The McDonald's jokes would be a lot funnier if McDonald's wasn't clearly culpable for the woman's burns due to the fact that they were selling the coffee at a temperature not only higher than the standard, but at a temperature that would cause the cup to deform like it was made out of tissue paper
      ... and worst of all, without a warning saying "don't grip this cup between your thighs while operating a motor vehicle" in big red letters.
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  3. they do that best? by chrismcdirty · · Score: 4, Funny
    'We look forward to putting this behind us and focusing on what we do best - creating videogames'
    I thought what they did best was create controversy.
    --
    It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    1. Re:they do that best? by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yeah. And I daresay controversy like this only makes kids want San Andreas all the more.

      Why not just rate every damn thing 'AO'? Certainly in the UK, GTA and similar games are rated '18' just for the violence, so 'Hot Coffee' wasn't a problem. Had it been included fully in the game, it would still have been an '18'.

      There's no way a GTA game should be aimed at children. What's the quarrel between an 'M', which I gather means '17', and an 'AO' which means '18'? Shame to lose out on the seventeen-year-old market, I suppose, but it would free Rockstar to put what the hell they liked into the game without worrying about whether some deleted scene will resurface and cause trouble.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:they do that best? by dR.fuZZo · · Score: 1

      Have you played the GTA games? They're better games than they are controversy.

      --
      -- dR.fuZZo
    3. Re:they do that best? by Valthan · · Score: 1

      I think the whole thing with wanting to keep it an M (correct me if I am wrong) but some major retailers won't carry it if it is rated AO (Walmart...?)

      --
      --Valthan
    4. Re:they do that best? by gregbains · · Score: 5, Insightful

      IIRC an AO will not be sold in shops like WalMart who prefer to keep such games away from their "good family morals" business, losing out on the WalMart market is a bigger loss than just losing out on the 17 market

    5. Re:they do that best? by tinkerghost · · Score: 4, Funny

      Retailers not 17 year olds, retailers won't stock it on the shelves if it's AO. Why?, because in some twisted marketing mindspace things nasty enough for mature teenagers only (graphic violence and aluded to sex) is credible, where-as adult only items (boobs) are the kiss of death to your credibility as a store.
      My wife sometimes wonders if she's a bad parent because she would prefer her son to be surfing porn than sites like this. Personally, I think seeing sex is a whole lot heathier than violence. Hmm, in that light, the 'Hot Coffee' is the most acceptable part of that game ...

    6. Re:they do that best? by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Retailers not 17 year olds, retailers won't stock it on the shelves if it's AO. Why?, because in some twisted marketing mindspace things nasty enough for mature teenagers only (graphic violence and aluded to sex) is credible, where-as adult only items (boobs) are the kiss of death to your credibility as a store.

      Hmm. Interesting.

      Very well... when the time comes to release GTA: TOKYO 2050 or whatever the next version might be, release the FULL-BLOODED version which Rockstar actually want to put out, and also the PARENT-SAFE version for Wal-Mart, in which we replace all the sex scenes with, oh, our hero dancing happily with Barney the Dinosaur or something like that.

      Then put up the patch to convert PARENT-SAFE up to FULL-BLOODED on ftp. Like the Carmageddon guys did back in the day, when censors forced them to replace pedestrians with green-blooded zombies. Back then, every PC games magazine put the Carmageddon blood patch on every cover disk for months, for the benefit of non-wired readers. I'm quite sure the same would happen with GTA.

      If you make it absolutely clear that the patch is AO content and will convert your wholesome, ultra-violent GTA game to a sexually deviant, ultra-violent GTA game, and that it's for those who accidentally bought the wrong version, you should be in the clear. There's no sex on the disk bought by the parents in the shop - so they knew what they were buying. There's plenty of sex on the later download, but hey - if you install AO patches, you expect AO content, right?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    7. Re:they do that best? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife sometimes wonders if she's a bad parent because she would prefer her son to be surfing porn than sites like this.

      If she objects to her son surfing stickdeath.com, it doesn't make her a bad parent, just one with no sense of humor.

      Parents with no ability to separate silly fantasy violence from real violence run the risk of raising serial killers. Try to work with her on these reality-preception issues, mkay?

    8. Re:they do that best? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      If a couple major studios just simply rated every game they make as AO, walmart would sell it.

      They would not forgo the massive profits a game like GTA gives them morality or not

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    9. Re:they do that best? by caleb_is_a_dharmabum · · Score: 1

      I got my copy of San Andreas at Wal-Mart. On sale.

    10. Re:they do that best? by LunarCrisis · · Score: 1

      Oh why, oh why has the parent been modded as funny instead of insightful?

      --
      Mr. Period: Nine is the one that's right by ten!
      Nine: One day I will kill him. Then, I will be Ten.
    11. Re:they do that best? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      The big difference is that most larger retailers and chain stores will carry an "M" rated title, but will not carry "AO" titles.

      Less shelf space = less revenus = less profit.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    12. Re:they do that best? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 5, Funny

      Personally, I think seeing sex is a whole lot heathier than violence.

      I have one word for you sir, Bukkake.

      I'd much, much rather explain to a child why the bad man on TV shot someone than explain why all of those bad men are glunking all over some poor woman's face.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    13. Re:they do that best? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but stores are willing to sell items rated 18 for Violence, but not for sex.

      Personally I think if there were more sex in society violence would probably wane...

    14. Re:they do that best? by gregbains · · Score: 1

      I got my copy of San Andreas at Wal-Mart. On sale.

      Yes, but was it the M rated version? Not saying it wasn't, just wondering.

    15. Re:they do that best? by Lugae · · Score: 1

      It most certainly says "M" on the box then.

    16. Re:they do that best? by Pink+Tinkletini · · Score: 1
      If she objects to her son surfing stickdeath.com, it doesn't make her a bad parent, just one with no sense of humor.
      Yeah, because this is fucking hilarious! Are you Wal-Mart shopping trailer trash?
    17. Re:they do that best? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wal-Mart has "good family morals"? Wow - you should say that to any honest business ethics prof in the venue of your choice.

    18. Re:they do that best? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Thank you for increasing my vocabulary. I didn't know what bukkake meant until your posting directed me to Wikipedia. It does sound pretty repulsive. But did you know that the origin of filth like this is exactly the prudishness that you, and others, defend? Wikipedia explains the origin of bukkake thus: "Since the directors could not show penetration they had to invent new, visually-appealing ways to approach sex acts that would satisfy the audience without violating Japanese law."

      Is there really anything wrong about children being allowed to see pictures of naked people? Even naked people happily making love?

    19. Re:they do that best? by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      I'd much, much rather explain to a child why the bad man on TV shot someone than explain why all of those bad men are glunking all over some poor woman's face.
      That has to be the worst comparison I've even seen. You're taking Gunsmoke or Xena level violence and comparing it to kinky group sex.

      More realistic examples would come from something like House, M.D.: we can see a guy's eye pop out of its socket, watch a doctor get splashed with blood when his scrotum explodes, and then get an eyeful of gore when he gets sliced in half - all in one episode. On the other hand, when House steps out of the shower or a woman is topless we have to be very careful not to show the naughty bits. Even more amusing, before we see the topless girl from the back, we get to see a full frontal shot of a guy with fully developed breasts.

      A better example would be: I'd much, much rather explain to a child why all of those rotting corpses are laying around than explain why the pretty girl has her shirt off.

      And I haven't even gotten to you odd sexual morals. Why on earth would you assume that your Bukkake guys are "bad men" and she's a "poor woman"? Can't they all just be adults having fun?

    20. Re:they do that best? by popsicle67 · · Score: 1

      As long as you can tell your child that the woman told the men they could do that, and she will be just fine when it is done, Bukkake is fine if it is seen. I had to go through the same thingwhen my 11 year old daughter found my ex-wifes Wired Pussy vids on the laptop the other day. She was most worried about the girls being hurt and the dom enjoying it so I had to explain that the girl was being hurt a little but it was okay because she wanted to be and the dom was not going to hurt her so bad that the girl ended up needing a doctor. I then had to explain the whole consent thing and safety words and such because the daughter was not quite at ease yet. Now my only problem is having to keep her away from the vids because she want to show her friends the cool outfits the dom wears. Parenthood takes funny roads from time to time

    21. Re:they do that best? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      But did you know that the origin of filth like this is exactly the prudishness that you, and others, defend?

      Keeping children from seeing explicit sexual materiel isn't prudish. It's responsible. Keeping adults from seeing other adults engaged in consentual activity is.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    22. Re:they do that best? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      And I haven't even gotten to you odd sexual morals. Why on earth would you assume that your Bukkake guys are "bad men" and she's a "poor woman"? Can't they all just be adults having fun?

      So, would you describe the men as "pillars of the community" and the woman as a "role model" when trying to explain it to a child?

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    23. Re:they do that best? by Anonymous+brave+dude · · Score: 1

      Wow, that's great.

    24. Re:they do that best? by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      Why is it so hard for you to grasp the idea that kinky sex alone is not enought to make someone good or bad? It's just something people do. End of story. Some are evil or abused, some are pillars of the community or role models, but their consentual sexual practices have no bearing on which group they would fall into.

      If a younger child saw Bukkake, my first concern would be for their feelings, like make sure they're not scared or upset, and also to let them know that that kind of thing is only for grownups. But I'd never suggest to them that it's bad just because it's sexual.

      For an older child, of course, the context would be important. If it's a rape scene (or something similar), then I would make sure they knew that this was like the bad guys in a violent movie. But if it was concentual, they I'd say it's just people having fun, but it's only for adults.

      Since you sidesteped my question, I'll ask it again. Why on earth would you assume that your Bukkake guys are "bad men" and she's a "poor woman"? And why would you assume that a bit of sarcasm would make your point clear?

    25. Re:they do that best? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would you assume that your Bukkake guys are "bad men" and she's a "poor woman"? And why would you assume that a bit of sarcasm would make your point clear?

      When talking with other adults, I don't consider either party to be "bad" or "poor". If I talking to a child who had accidentally come across it, I suspect that's the route that the discussion would take.

      To ask the question again "So, would you describe the men as "pillars of the community" and the woman as a "role model" when trying to explain it to a child?"

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    26. Re:they do that best? by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      So, would you describe the men as "pillars of the community" and the woman as a "role model" when trying to explain it to a child?
      No, why would I? It's not good or bad, just adult. I don't understand what prompted you to ask the question in the first place. Would you do the same thing with beer?

      Here's my interpretation of the conversation:

      You: I tell my kids that beer is bad.

      Me: Beer isn't bad, it's just not for kids.

      You: So you tell your kids that beer is super-cool and it's the only thing they should drink?

      Me: What?

      If I talking to a child who had accidentally come across it, I suspect that's the route that the discussion would take.
      Why do you want to tell the kid it's bad when you wouldn't tell and adult the same thing? You teach you kids that adults can use knives but kids can't, without saying that the TV chef is "bad", isn't that the right way to handle sex as well?
    27. Re:they do that best? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      I had nearly given up on getting a response. One more post and this would have dropped off of my user page.

      You: I tell my kids that beer is bad.

      Me: Beer isn't bad, it's just not for kids.


      I tell children that beer can be bad for both kids and adults and that when they're adults they can decide for themselves.

      Why do you want to tell the kid it's bad when you wouldn't tell and adult the same thing?

      Because most children aren't capable of grasping the all to adult concepts that are a part of sexuality. I'm not talking about adolescents who are experiencing sexual feelings of their own. I'm talking about prepubescent children.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    28. Re:they do that best? by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      I had nearly given up on getting a response. One more post and this would have dropped off of my user page.
      New apartment, new job and an out of state wedding. I barely had time to sleep.

      most children aren't capable of grasping the all to adult concepts that are a part of sexuality
      True. I guess I think that telling them that sex, guns or swear words are bad is going to leave an impression that won't go away easily, while telling them that sex is for grownups and not for them protects them without generating the same nagative feelings. I don't want my (future) adult kids' opinion on gun control or sexuality to be set by my attempts to insulate them as a child. Maybe my desire to keep hitting = "No, bad!", knives = "No, hurt!" and sex = "No, adult!" is a bit more than is really necessary, but I take child rearing very seriously, and I want them to be as free as possible to make up their own minds as they grow up.
  4. It's only a speeding ticket by LostCluster · · Score: 0

    $14,000 per incident is nothing compared to the scale of a major video game publisher. Shouldn't they be liable for closer to $1.4 million the next time they release M rating content hidden within a lower-rated game?

    1. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 1

      I think that was basically the idea. Slap em on the wrist, because an M-rated game should already only be bought by non-minors. There's more sex and nudity in today's PG-13 movies than most M rated games.

    2. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by sqlrob · · Score: 1

      What's the definition of incident?

      Is it per Hot Coffee, or is it per Hot Coffee sold?

    3. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by Denyer · · Score: 1

      It's a game about shooting and beating people. If anyone likely to be twisted by fuzzy polygon boobs is playing, their parents are incompetent.

      --
      Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Gates M'dna wgah'nagl fhtagn.
    4. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Before anybody rings me up for inaccuracy... Let me correct that Hot Coffee deserves an AO rating, whlie GTA only wore an M.

    5. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by snuf23 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "release M rating content hidden within a lower-rated game"

      You mean A rated content hidden within a M rated game. The GTA series is rated M. The beauty of it is that according to the rating system 17 year olds are "mature" enough to deal with beating innocent bystanders to death with a baseball bat but should not be exposed to nudity or sex.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    6. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by meringuoid · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Before anybody rings me up for inaccuracy... Let me correct that Hot Coffee deserves an AO rating, whlie GTA only wore an M.

      Which, as I understand it, means San Andreas was originally rated suitable for people aged 17 and up, but with the restoration of the supposedly deleted scene it ought to have been rated only for people aged 18 and up.

      Yeah. I can see why this is a major upset. I mean, with the enormous difference between a naive, callow youth of 17 able to deal only with baseball-bat beatings, drive-by shootings, murder by bludgeoning with a massive purple dildo and armed sieges with the cops... and a grizzled, seasoned old 18-year-old who is mature enough to view a sex scene.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    7. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Shouldn't they be liable for closer to $1.4 million the next time they release M rating content hidden within a lower-rated game?"

      Technically, they *should* be liable for $0.

    8. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by Alexandra+Erenhart · · Score: 1

      I completely agree with the parent. And the fact that you actually had to willingly unlock the sex scene, makes the rates even more absurd (comparing tv and games)

    9. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If its $11,000 per incident and they cite all the copies of the game sold (12 million) as an incident the fine for this would have been $132,000,000,000.

      I think thats significant enough.

    10. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by F_Scentura · · Score: 1

      "If anyone likely to be twisted by fuzzy polygon boobs is playing, their parents are incompetent."

      If anyone is likely to be damaged by virtual titties, their parents have already failed them long before the game was purchased.

    11. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by westlake · · Score: 1
      $14,000 per incident is nothing compared to the scale of a major video game publisher. Shouldn't they be liable for closer to $1.4 million the next time they release M rating content hidden within a lower-rated game?

      The fine is trivial.

      Keeping your product on the shelves of the big box retailers is not.

      In an election year, social conservatives and Republicans in particular won't be happy to see video game violence and sex back in the news again. The FTC should be least of Rockstar's worries.

    12. Re:It's only a speeding ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $14,000 per incident is nothing compared to the scale of a major video game publisher.

      and the additional sale because of people finding out about the easteregg.

  5. bad off topic joke by k3v0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    what does Eric Clapton have in common with coffee?

    They both suck without cream

    1. Re:bad off topic joke by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      Funny joke. I snickered. Although Clapton was pretty good with the Yardbirds and Derek and the Dominos, too.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    2. Re:bad off topic joke by mypalmike · · Score: 1

      There's a similar joke about Bob Mould/Sugar:

      How are coffee and Bob Mould alike? They both suck without Husker Du.

      --
      There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
    3. Re:bad off topic joke by k3v0 · · Score: 1

      hahaha i like that one.

  6. slap on the wrist by Belgarion89 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wow, they got off easy. Eric Idle dropped the F-bomb on the radio and got fined $5,000

    1. Re:slap on the wrist by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      This is why the FCC wanted the fine-per-violation to be multiplied by ten to $50,000 because it's quite profitable to violate regularly and then write off the fines as the cost of doing business.

    2. Re:slap on the wrist by Surt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Shouldn't they have gotten off easy?

      1) They weren't OTA, and they didn't use public resources to distribute their speech.

      2) This is the F T C not the FCC.

      3) The content in question was not accessible without a DMCA violation.

      Why should this have even been an issue for Take 2?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  7. More evidence that sex is expensive by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Interesting


    From the last line in the article:

    The removal of San Andreas from most retailers' shelves followed by a re-rating of the title resulted in a loss of nearly $25 million.

    Ouch!

    1. Re:More evidence that sex is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No way. The losses reported had to be due to piracy. </sarcasm>

      How do they calculate such losses anyway?

    2. Re:More evidence that sex is expensive by luckyguesser · · Score: 1

      products, especially products in a mature market such as computer gaming, will often have a predictable 'life cycle', so to speak. couple this with the fact that this is not by any means Rockstar's first release, as well as the fact that there was probably a great deal of market research to determine the popularity of the game long before it finished production.

      any business with a good business model will have some sort of estimate (and that's an understatement... usually it's been researched into the ground and more...) on how much a product will make in sales throughout its lifetime.

      i would expect that San Andreas had been predictably following the curve of estimated sales pretty closely when the discs were yanked off the shelves. it would then stand to reason that, since they know how many copies were pulled that would have otherwise sold, and they know how long the product was not sitting on the shelves, they can also closely estimate losses.

      --


      The power of Christ compiles you.
      A Random Blog
    3. Re:More evidence that sex is expensive by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### The removal of San Andreas from most retailers' shelves followed by a re-rating of the title resulted in a loss of nearly $25 million.

      Sales number put GTA:SA on par with the previous GTA releases, so while pulling it back from the shelves for sure costs some money, I can't see how that should go anywhere near that $25mio number.

  8. big deal? by celardore · · Score: 3, Informative

    People made an awful big fuss of this. The fact is that you had to delibrately do something to even enable the Hot Coffee feature. Sure the company put it in there, but the user had to make a choice and do several things to enable it. Wasn't like it was there for all to see willy-nilly.

    1. Re:big deal? by mmcguiggan · · Score: 2, Funny

      Even so, I feel it ruined that inoocent and wholesome feeling you get when lighting prostitutes and innocent bystanders ablaze.

    2. Re:big deal? by oahazmatt · · Score: 5, Funny
      Even so, I feel it ruined that inoocent and wholesome feeling you get when lighting prostitutes and innocent bystanders ablaze.

      I hear ya, buddy. I remember when Grand Theft Auto was a family game. We'd all sit around the television, cheering each other on. I remember Gran'pa screaming "Way to go Billy! Twice in the head and drop the gun, that's my boy!"

      But after Hot Coffee? I just don't know anymore.
      --
      Those who believe the Internet is private,
      find their privates are on the Internet.
    3. Re:big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Way to go Billy! Twice in the head and drop the gun, that's my boy!"

      Gold.

    4. Re:big deal? by Poltron+Inconnu · · Score: 0

      This is not a good point. While I feel the "hot coffee" thing was blown way out of proportion one could counter your particular point quite easily. Just about all content in games requires the user to make a choice and do several things to enable it. Be it the built in cheat codes or special modes (big head mode, disco mode, etc.) or even just cut scenes that you access as you play the game. They are all there and only available if you take certain actions. I don't think the "hot coffee" mod required much more work than many people go through to find cheat codes or walk-thrus that enable them to access all the content.
      I'd stick more to arguments about the absurdity of a little sex raising the rating of a game centered on extreme violence and criminal pursuits.

    5. Re:big deal? by assassinator42 · · Score: 1

      IIRC, you had to edit a save file or game file to get it, so a little more work than just punching in a cheat code.

    6. Re:big deal? by docbob · · Score: 1

      It reminds me of a few years ago, that there was some 'adult' content on a Tiger Woods Golf game for a PlayStation (though it may have been a Nintendo). You could take the CD and put it in the coputer to get to it but not view it on the PS. Now the minute that kids heard about it they put all their games CDs into computers to find content.
      the point is, that once kids get the word they will do whatever they can to try to share it with others. The content was there and had to go through steps to get to it. In the process, they share with others. Is it right for it to have been there in the first place? IMHO no, but I do not play games of that nature anyway.
      The Doc

    7. Re:big deal? by pboulang · · Score: 1
      I do not play games of that nature anyway.
      How do you know? Do you use a rating system?

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

  9. Wow, you wildly misinterpreted the situation by James+A.+V.+Joyce · · Score: 0

    I hate state censorship as much as it deserves, but I hate to almost the same degree people who use any situation to screech about state censorship, even when it's apropos of nothing. The FTC didn't crack down on Rockstar for having dry humping and simulated oral sex in its game. The FTC punished them for mislabelling the game, effectively misrepresenting the contents. Now, you can argue about whether or not Rockstar ought to be obliged to use the arbitrary ESRB labelling system or not, but again: Rockstar are being fined for misusing the ESRB system, not for producing a game with smut in it.

    1. Re:Wow, you wildly misinterpreted the situation by krell · · Score: 1

      "Rockstar is being fined for misusing the ESRB system, not for producing a game with smut in it."

      We both know that it is the smut that drove the whole thing and made the controversy. There'd have been nothing like this if the mislabelling was over something more substantial (such as a label that says Mac Compatible and it won't play on Macs).

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
  10. Yes but... by Ponga · · Score: 2, Funny

    What about the 'Hot Grits' Scandal??

  11. Of course not, are you thick? It was a MOD. by James+A.+V.+Joyce · · Score: 0

    You cannot access Hot Coffee without altering the game's data files. It's not Rockstar's fault if people alter the game in order to enable content not intended for use; remember, it wasn't possible to access Hot Coffee via the game's normal interface out of the box.

  12. Jack Thompson must be really upset by this..... by 8127972 · · Score: 1

    ....... So somebody will need to buy him some hot coffee to calm him down.

    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
    1. Re:Jack Thompson must be really upset by this..... by CCFreak2K · · Score: 1

      Only the hottest will do!

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
    2. Re:Jack Thompson must be really upset by this..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just pray he doesn't spill it in his lap

  13. $11,000 for future violations by frovingslosh · · Score: 1
    the company will be subject to civil penalties of $11,000 for future violations

    No fine this time and $11,000 in the future? They couldn't buy publicity this cheap! They would be fools not to put something in future releases that was intended to get them fined.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:$11,000 for future violations by Kamineko · · Score: 1
      $11,000 for future violations?


      So, they got Hot Coffee from the future, then? Bloody hell, where's Gage Blackwood, or Blinx when you need them, eh?

    2. Re:$11,000 for future violations by staeiou · · Score: 1
      I think the FTC took into account the fact that it cost over $25 million to pull the game from the shelves and re-release it as an AO game - a cost which Take Two had to pay in full. This was probably their most expensive publicity stunt ever.

      From the article:


      Although Take-Two was not fined, the company will be subject to civil penalties of $11,000 per violation going forward. As was pointed out when the FTC first announced the settlement back in June, Take-Two got what essentially amounted to a slap on the wrist. The "Hot Coffee" scandal certainly cost the company, however. The removal of San Andreas from most retailers' shelves followed by a re-rating of the title resulted in a loss of nearly $25 million.
    3. Re:$11,000 for future violations by Penguinoflight · · Score: 1

      you did read the part about take-two getting back to doing what they do best right?

      --
      "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
      1 John 4:14
  14. STFU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    STFU YOU MFKING AHOLE

  15. 4 responces by tinkerghost · · Score: 1
    4 responces
    • How dare you impune my credibility by pointing out the obvious fact that I'm wrong?
    • Can't you see that I'm doing this for the children?
    • Goodness, if you won't let me go after Take-Two for this, how can I possibly go after the boobie mods for all the other games out there?!
    • It's not like parents should have to take any responsibility for what their children are doing on a computer. That's downright unAmerican.
    Choose one & run with it.
  16. Those fiends ! by krell · · Score: 1

    "Actually, it's more like the folks at Mars replaced the proteins in the peanuts with a kind that could be converted to a toxin..."

    Those fiends! They'll destroy us for sure. I always knew they were plotting to get revenge for the humiliation when we stopped their vast deathray-tripod army 100 years ago just by sneezing on them.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  17. And another thing: by James+A.+V.+Joyce · · Score: 0

    Rockstar lost over twenty five million dollars having to pull the game off the shelf. Compared to that, $1.4 million is only a slap on the wrist, and a redundant slap on the wrist at that.

  18. That site is hilarious! by FatSean · · Score: 1

    I didn't know white trash could use the internet...

    --
    Blar.
  19. Moderators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't like it was there for all to see willy-nilly.

    This post contained secret adult oriented content in the form of the word "willy". This could cause catastrophic damage to anyone reading it under the age of 73. Clearly this post should have a 1 rating, not a 2. Please amend accordingly and fine celadore $17,000 for any future violations.

  20. Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am so sick and tired of hearing that this is a "truth-in-labeling" violation! This was nothing more than a "protect the children" witch hunt!

    The segment in question was included but was never meant to be accessed! It took someone else's hack, which might or might not have been in violation of the game's EULA, to release it. Therefore, the accessibility to that whole section of code was not authorized by Take Two or Rockstar. Yet they were made the scapegoat in nothing more that a politically-charged witch hunt. There was abosultely NO REASON for Take Two/Rockstar to disclose that information because they had NO EXPECTATION that it would ever been seen by any customer.

    For example, let's say that I included the following type of code in a huge program that I'm writing. (No comments about the Perl. I'm just making an example.)

    $ESRB = "Neutral";
    if ($ESRB eq "Evil") {
    print "The ESRB is a bunch of fucking, holier-than-thou, moralistic morons.\n";
    print "And you're mother's ugly, too.\n";
    }

    Obviously, that code is never meant to be seen because $ESRB is being explicity set to bypass the if statement. So, I compile the whole program, with the code that was never meant to be seen, get a "T" rating for the whole program, and release the program. In my EULA is an explicit statement that no one is allowed to modify the code.

    Then some moron sees it in the compiled code and releases an unauthorized hack to change $ESRB to "Evil". Suddenly, there's a big bruhaha because it should have been "M" due to the language of the code.

    Now the ESRB and Thompson are on my case for not revealing the code that was in there. WHY? The code was never meant to be seen - not even as an Easter egg. There is no reasonable expectation of me letting the ESRB know that the code was in there because there was no reasonable expectation that it would ever be seen. Someone went in without my permission and modified the code to see something that was never meant to be seen.

    There is no reason why Take Two/Rockstar should be held accountable for the release of something that was never meant to be available in the first place. This was nothing close to a "truth-in-labeling" violation. It was a do-gooder, "for the sake of the children", witch hunt. Rockstar took the high road and just let it slide, which was probably the best PR they could have done, but they were nothing more than a scapegoat.

    --
    The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
  21. I'll proofread better next time. by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    *sigh* And of course, "you're" is supposed to be "your". Oh, well. It's late on a Friday afternoon. That can forgive a lot. :)

    Then again, such misspellings are the norm around here anyway. >:)

    --
    The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
  22. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by plover · · Score: 1
    Amen, brother!!

    I take exception to only one sentence you wrote: It was a do-gooder, "for the sake of the children", witch hunt.

    The witch hunters were not do-gooders. They were witch hunters, pure, simple and 100% evil. There was nothing good in what they did, there were no children "protected", there were no parents enlightened. They grabbed their immoral viewpoint (hey, I have morals and they're nothing like what these idiots espouse) and dragged it into a courtroom, where they confused a judge into agreeing with them.

    --
    John
  23. That's just as maybe... by James+A.+V.+Joyce · · Score: 0

    ...but if Rockstar are going to use a rating system, they should use it properly, regardless.

  24. Witch hunt? by sco08y · · Score: 1

    This was nothing more than a "protect the children" witch hunt!

    Historically, the witches being hunted were usually spinsters, desperately poor and quite often schizophrenic or some similar affliction.

    Comparing a modestly successful video game company (or a prominent politician as you usually here) being dragged through entirely nonviolent proceedings to a witch being pressed for a confession is as ridiculous as calling someone a pirate for downloading an MP3.

  25. Definition of "witch hunt" is 100% accurate. by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 2, Informative

    The definition of "witch hunt" in this case is far more accurate than you might think.

    From Answers.com (emphasis mine):

    witch-hunt also witch hunt (wch'hnt') n.

    An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views.

    witchhunter witch'-hunt'er n.
    witchhunting witch'-hunt'ing adj. & n.


    Mind telling again me how this is not an accurate term?

    --
    The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
    1. Re:Definition of "witch hunt" is 100% accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also worth noting that "piracy" is a perfectly valid term for illegal downloading of music. Because that's what it means. Whether or not this has any connection to wearing an eyepatch and sailing the high seas is irrelevant.

    2. Re:Definition of "witch hunt" is 100% accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views.

      That seems pretty weak. What's the difference between a "subversive" activity and one based on differing views? It sounds like a fine distinction at best. The preferred view of the witchhunter is precisely what is being 'subverted'. Isn't it?
  26. What actually was the punishment? by LordSnooty · · Score: 0

    So, nothing really happened as a result of this fuss. No fine, but a threat of a fine in the future... well, isn't that what occurs anyway? No fine now indicates nothing was wrong. Ah, but hold on...

    "the Company shall not misrepresent a video game's ratings or content descriptors and that the Company shall implement a system to ensure that all game content is reviewed in connection with submissions to ratings authorities."

    Oh, so once again, that's exactly what happens anyway. All that brouhaha for this? Might I suggest that certain persons in the US are over-sensitive? I bet you wish it was more like Europe.

  27. Backward sexual attitudes in this country... by LinDVD · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Unfortunately, there will be another issue sometime that will raise the ire of people who can't deal with the topic of human sexuality openly. I wonder what it would take for this country will ever "grow up?"

    --
    Just because you get modded "insightful" on Slashdot doesn't mean you actually are in real life.
    1. Re:Backward sexual attitudes in this country... by Minshu · · Score: 1

      If this "country" wasn't composed of about 70% FAT-ASS, maybe I'd be more open to the idea of open sexuality. But until then, I don't want to see the average American doing ANYTHING sexual... Not sure how much more grown up I can get than that. You really want to see Larry the Cable Guy and Rossanne Barr doing the nasty? Cause that's about what it would be like with 'open sexuality' here in the states.

  28. Take Two *investors* had a *right* to know ... by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    This was nothing more than a "protect the children" witch hunt!

    Sorry, the truth is that things are more complicated than you are aware of. Take Two is a publicly traded company. Federal law requires that Take Two inform *investors* of the risks that face the company. If Hot Coffee was intentional, a marketing gimmick, then Take Two had a legal responsibility to inform investors that its marketing strategy could result in product recalls, no charge replacements, loss of retail outlets, etc. The FTC had every right to investigate whether Hot Coffee was a marketing gimmick or not. It *is* the FTC's job to protect *investors* from the sort of non-disclosure just described.

    1. Re:Take Two *investors* had a *right* to know ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes - spoken like only a lawyer who scents blood in the air can. People should obviously be warned about spilling scalding hot coffee on their own genitals too because, "What the fsck! This coffee is hot?! It's GoNNa BUrN ME?!?! Oh NoEs!!one!oneone!".

      Idiot fuckers.

  29. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by pbhj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    >>> "There is no reason why Take Two/Rockstar should be held accountable for the release of something that was never meant to be available in the first place."

    Wow, that's naive in the extreme. "never meant to be available". Er, yeah, right!

    Take Two: Like, ooh darn-it how did we accidentally develop and leave in all those extra bits and then get our friends to release a patch making us ten times more money than we would have made. Shucks, best not do that again.

    Goverment: We'll fine you $11k if you do that again, naughty boys.

    Take Two: That'll hurt our 20 million* profits for sure...

    [ * - yes I made it up.]

  30. Precidents by LindseyJ · · Score: 1

    There is a disturbing and disapointing precident being set here by the rulings in this case and by the attitudes the ESRB has taken toward it. It's furthered by the fact that another game after GTA:SA has had its rating upped based on something that was never in the game: Oblivion. What this spells for the modding community at large - and even designers who might otherwise release modding tools for their games - is yet to be seen, but I don't think it bodes well for them. Then again, you don't have to look very far in Battle.net to see a crapload of shitty Warcraft III and Starcraft porn maps, and nobody's done anything about them.

  31. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by AbRASiON · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wow, that's probably one of the most stupid posts I've seen on slashdot in a while, -congratulations.

    They got "their friends" to release a patch eh? - the PC gaming guys trawled through the data files looking for stuff and found this, once discovered I beleive it was then attempted on the consoles with a gameshark device and also found.

    As for increased sales due this, L.O.L indeed - rockstar get an obscene (note the pun) amount of sales with or without some shitty little porn section of the game.

    Think before posting.

  32. How else shall we let the govt. take our money. by Eagleartoo · · Score: 0, Troll

    Okay let's see, sales taxes on the video game, taxes on your DSL lines and phone lines, cable taxes, court costs, legal fees, publicity, senators wasting their time in office which we are paying them to come up with legislation for the good of our country, the ESRB another fat bureaucracy. And then all to come to what conclusion boys and girls?! OH no penalty, and a restating of a law. I may have read it wrong but it sounds as though absolutley nothing came of this but a bunch of wasted tax money. So now we can all thank the Government for keeping us safe! Thanks Your Royal Highness Clinton

    --
    -You have been modded appropriately-
    1. Re:How else shall we let the govt. take our money. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey half-whit, The ESRB isn't a government organization, it's an industry (that would be the game industry, btw, not the government industry) funded self-regulatory body. So while I'm sure they'd love to have some of your tax dollars, they don't actually get any. But thanks for playing!

  33. And behind the curtain... by SEWilco · · Score: 3, Funny
    Take-Two Interactive today announced that the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) inquiry concerning hidden sexual content in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas has formally closed.
    ... but can be reopened with an optional code.
  34. Almost Plausable Deniability... by ObligatoryUserName · · Score: 1

    Honestly, no one except insiders know the true intent.

    However, while it's easy to give them the benefit of the doubt that they left in executable code that wasn't intended to be accessed, doesn't it seem strange that they left in the animation data for the Hot Coffee sequence?

    If they hadn't included those files on the disc, the game would probably have just crashed when it was hacked.

  35. nice work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm impressed ... no really

  36. Uhhh except all games do that by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All the time games leave assets in they don't use. It's a problem that MS is actually working to solve with the Xbox 360 dev kits (to save space). You make an asset for a game, maybe a level, model, texture, or even whole mini game that just doesn't make it in to the final product. However you don't remove it since you don't know what else relies on the presence of that, and since space usually isn't short.

    My bet is they made the Hot Coffee game, realised it'd get them an AO rating, and so cut it. Pure and simple.

    You can see a similar thing with Civ 4. There's mods that will add some "lost wonders." These are wonders with full videos, info and everything, they are fully produced. Basically, Firaxis planned on using them, but then cut them later, I believe for game balance reasons. However they didn't bother to remove the assets so witha bit of XML and LUA modificaiton, they can go back in the game.

    1. Re:Uhhh except all games do that by Axe+336 · · Score: 1

      Its true, thats what happened with the Oblivion topless mod also. Of course, thats not the reason the rating was changed on that game (Thankfully), but thats what it was, undeleted content that a user was never supposed to access while playing the game. I read in Game Informer that ESRB is changing its policy so that the game developers can't leave that kinda stuff lying around in the final product anymore. I guess its kinda like if a new restaurant opened and the inspector came and checked out the restaurant but didn't check a closet full of things that the owners said were "Junk we didn't use in making the restaurant" and some day a kid opens the closet while roaming the restaurant looking for the bathroom and several erotic paintings fall out. Is the restaurant at fault?

    2. Re:Uhhh except all games do that by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 1

      In that example, the restaurant is at fault -- however, if those erotic items were walled up and forgotten in a section of the building where without special tools and a hell of a lot of luck, nobody could find them, I don't think anyone would hold it against them.

      I think a better analogy would be if somebody wrote a horrificly violent book, perhaps even a comic, and some joker decided to scribble crude pornographic drawings in the margins in invisible ink. Now let's assume that in order to make this ink visible, you had to go out and get something at a store that sold or prominantly displayed actual pornography. Would the invisible drawings themselves, which would never ever be found under normal circumstances, make the product dangerous and pornographic, purely because a child could conceivably reveal them if he/she already had access to purveyors of pornography or even friends who could just as easily scribble naughty images themselves?

  37. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by JunkmanUK · · Score: 1

    "As for increased sales due this, L.O.L indeed - rockstar get an obscene (note the pun) amount of sales with or without some shitty little porn section of the game."

    Have you never heard of the phrase 'any publicity is good publicity'?

    It's an ancient well known fact in the marketing industry that scandal provides better, cheaper (free!) advertising on a massive scale. While I'm not making any statement as to whether they intentionally let this happen it's foolish to suggest that they didn't reap the rewards.

    As a small, insigificant example - you just had to look on ebay the next day to see the flurry of activity - 'buy this game now for £100 before it gets banned' etc...

    That product became the most talked about game in the country (certainly in the UK) for a short period - are you telling me that everyone was tutting and denouncing it, and that nobody thought 'hmmm, I might buy this to have a look'?

  38. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by praetorfenix69 · · Score: 1

    First, I'll point out that I agree with most of your points. However, I want to point out that it is the policy of the ESRB that you have to disclose all possibly offensive content on the disk, regardless of whether it appears in the game or not. For the reasons you mentioned, I don't particularly agree with this policy, but it is the ESRB's policy and it has been since long before the Hot Coffee scandal.

  39. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by nyri · · Score: 1

    The segment in question was included but was never meant to be accessed!

    Don't be naive. Of course it was ment to be accessed. Ant it was. And the segment in question worked like it was supposed to: people started to talk about Grand Theft Auto and Take-Two. And I think that even a few teenagers bought the game to see the "hot coffee".

  40. The reason why the whole incident is a threat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... to the game industry is this: the ESRB was created as a voluntary, self-regulation alternative to government (FCC) regulation over the video game biz when Congress began mulling regulatory rules. With the ESRB, what we have is an independant organization employing regular people as raters (raters cannot have a tie to the game industry) instead of know-nothing politicians bought^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^pursuaded by special interest groups dictating what's fine and what's not for all publishers. If incidents like this become repeat problems, the FCC will eventually decide that the ESRB isn't doing a good enough job and take over.

    Whether or not the content was intended to be accessible or not, someone put it in the final build, and they should have known it could be found -- people have been hacking games for a long time. I'd rather the ESRB come down heavy handed on publishers/developers who are either maliciously or negligently putting in content that goes beyond the rating provided so that the rest of the industry doesn't have to suffer regulation by the FCC.

  41. God of War by Vermifax · · Score: 1

    What always amazed me about this whole deal is that God of War which is also rated M has a sex mini game right in the beginning of the game that requires nothing to unlock, is meant to be seen by everyone who plays the game. The game has topless women in it........

    AND NOBODY FREAKIN CARES!

    This whole thing about hot coffee is a load of crap. It was self-righteous outrage about something that isn't a problem. I'm glad Take Two got off with what amounts to a speeding ticket.

    --

    Vermifax

    Logout
  42. Re:Bullsh*t! It was NOT a violation of ANYTHING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The hacking people also found an unfinished skateboarding game in there - it was also simply commented out.

  43. Hmmm by Sv-Manowar · · Score: 1

    As much as it is right to argue that there shouldn't be much fuss over what is an already extremely explicit game, the fact is that it should have been Adults Only if the mod was in the game instead of it's R, what I find amazing is the way that it actually required external code to open the mod and they still claimed that it was content meant to be played in the game. Does that mean if somewhere in an encrypted archive on a game DVD there is a topless woman picture that isn't even used then the game should be AO because the content is 'there'. I don't think so.

  44. Re:ATTENTION SLASHDOT by lord_rob+the+only+on · · Score: 1

    If I had mod points, I would have modded this AC up. Nice artwork mate !

  45. To Rockstar: I want my money back! by rubberbando · · Score: 1

    I may get modded troll for this but I am annoyed with the whole 'Hot coffee' ordeal because I can't trade in my copy of GTA:San Andreas at any used game store because it has the 'bad' content on it and apparently has been banned from sale. I didn't really care for GTA:San Andreas and I was very pissed off when I was told that I couldn't trade it in towards something else because of this.

    I would sell it on Ebay but last time I checked, they're flooded with other people trying to unload their copy. In turn, it wouldn't be worth all of the hassles of Ebay to get the few dollars that it would fetch.

    --
    DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
    1. Re:To Rockstar: I want my money back! by amrust · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just hang onto it, and let the glut of eBay people dumping their copy get out of the way. Yours has the original content on it, and the passage of time won't change that. It's a collector's item, really. I'm keeping mine, but if you want to sell it, just be patient, and it will probably only go up in value, in time.

      --
      VOTE!