the 'Hot Coffee' controversy...

[stingerhs]

i'm not sure if you've heard the latest, but the game "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" now has an 'AO', or 'Adults Only' rating instead of the 'M' for Mature rating.

 

and all of it is due to a mod, otherwise known as the 'Hot Coffee' mod. i'd explain in detail, but i'd rather just point you to the article from Gamespot where you can get all the gritty details.

 

the link: http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/07/20/news_6129500.html

 

so, thoughts??

[REDJOHNNYMIKE]

I'm a little sleepy, and didn't get everything, but it seems like a mix of Modding gone wrong, and not tying up loose ends before shipping the game out.

 

But if that stuff was in there to begin with, then there should be an adults only warning.

[Achilles]

Well the GTA franchise is all about debauchery. I think that the hot coffee content was in poor taste, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'm offended by it. The content (along with the naked "girlfriend" skins that don't seem to be getting as much attention) definitely fits the AO rating, so I can't say that the ESRB is making a mistake.

 

Personally, my biggest concerns are:

 

1) That parents are educating themselves about mods and talking to their teenagers about what's appropriate and what isn't.

 

2) That this episode doesn't result in the discontinuation of the GTA franchise. If it weren't for Tommy Vercetti and CJ, I probably would have killed my boss ages ago

[Aash Li]

Wow. i Think I hear hell freezing over. lol. I kind of agree with Hillary Clinton's backing the decision to up the ESRB.

 

I never liked the GTA games, and the San Andreas sequel makes me like it even less.

[Achilles]

*aghast*

 

But...but...GTA:SA is the best one. *Covers ears ala Gollum* Not listening.

[REDJOHNNYMIKE]

"Well the GTA franchise is all about debauchery."

 

That's why I don't play it:D

And, I don't really (everybody chill out now) like any of RockStars games:p

[RedHawke]

Ah! Yes but the real nightmare of this article is the following statement... I bolded the pertinent part;

 

There was no misquoting Patricia Vance, president of the ESRB. In a sternly worded statement on the ESRB site, she said "we have concluded that sexually explicit material exists in a fully rendered, unmodified form on the final discs of all three platform versions of the game (i.e., PC CD-ROM, Xbox, and PS2)." She also had harsh words for Take-Two. "Considering the existence of the undisclosed and highly pertinent content on the final discs, compounded by the broad distribution of the third party modification, the credibility and utility of the initial ESRB rating has been seriously undermined," she said. "Going forward, the ESRB will now require all game publishers to submit any pertinent content shipped in final product even if is not intended to ever be accessed during game play, or remove it from the final disc."

This means that game companies are more likely to now to omit bonus materials, or extras that we, game modders can use... even innocent ones.

 

This statement shows that this is rapidly becoming a ploy to simply control what can be released in an electronic game, this is a bid for power, and one that looks real nefarious to me. While the GTA series may offend some of you, it has a right to exist as released, without all the Gestapo-esque interference!

 

Once they open that Pandoras Box and start all the censorship crap it will never end.

[RevanA4]

Originally posted by Aash Li

Wow. i Think I hear hell freezing over. lol. I kind of agree with Hillary Clinton's backing the decision to up the ESRB.

 

I never liked the GTA games, and the San Andreas sequel makes me like it even less.

 

 

same here I've played it once and that was once to many the whole advocating crime thing is what turned me away:o all i can see of GTA games is all ya do is go around commiting crimes

 

@Achilles um try halo and halo2 on easy it works for that kind of thing and the grunts will have ya:rofl:

 

Originally posted by RedHawke

This means that game companies are more likely to now to omit bonus materials, or extras that we, game modders can use... even innocent ones.

 

This statement shows that this is rapidly becoming a ploy to simply control what can be released in an electronic game, this is a bid for power, and one that looks real nefarious to me. While the GTA series may offend some of you, it has a right to exist as released, without all the Gestapo-esque interference!

 

Once they open that Pandoras Box and start all the censorship crap it will never end.

 

:disaprove while censorship of movies is and escential evil I believe the the parents should be desiding what they want there kids to play on the government and the rateings of games should be there as a measure for the parents not the government.

 

some of the games i have the only reason I still play them is because you can mod them and take nwn for example the only reason I still play it is because i can create my own weapons and armour that my character can use because I have beaten it and I usually play a wizard and with out any good armour your dead in 5 seconds:p and the fact you can create your own scripts leagally:p which is what started me on scripting

[stingerhs]

Originally posted by RedHawke

This means that game companies are more likely to now to omit bonus materials, or extras that we, game modders can use... even innocent ones.

 

This statement shows that this is rapidly becoming a ploy to simply control what can be released in an electronic game, this is a bid for power, and one that looks real nefarious to me. While the GTA series may offend some of you, it has a right to exist as released, without all the Gestapo-esque interference!

 

Once they open that Pandoras Box and start all the censorship crap it will never end.

well, IMHO, i don't think that this ruling will have as much of an effect on the bonus materials as you think. if the bonus materials aren't explicit in nature, then why would the devs have to worry about them?? they only thing they would be worried about would be cut content such as the stuff in San Andreas. personally, i back such a desicion as it shows that the ESRB does indeed have some backbone.

 

and yes, censorship in games has been going on for quite some time, although not to the degree that it probably will be in the future. will in interfere with development of future games?? possibly, but that is much more dependant on the audiences the devs are wanting to reach. if they want to release a lot of explicit content, thats fine because an audience of adults can accept it, but children should not have access to such a game.

 

most devs out there already have an idea as to what kind of rating they want for their particular game, so they will continue to do what they have done: adjust the content so they can get the audience they want for the game.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Originally posted by RedHawke

This statement shows that this is rapidly becoming a ploy to simply control what can be released in an electronic game, this is a bid for power, and one that looks real nefarious to me. While the GTA series may offend some of you, it has a right to exist as released, without all the Gestapo-esque interference!

 

This is why I think we should take arms, conquer some piece of land and start a new country called Gameristan.

 

The Hot Coffee mod doesn't bother me that much. I haven't really been interested in downloading it since just hearing the description makes me wonder if I'm playing a game or watching porn.

It's one or the other, not both at the same time.

 

What does bother me in this whole story is the reaction by some people. I'm for an AO rating for GTA: SA but not for a sex scene. For the violence, sure, but for sex, nope, doesn't make that much sense to me.

Then again, it's America, where killing on TV is ok but a naked breast and they'll lapidate the one responsible.

 

You also need to note the ESRB's wonderful rating system.

 

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.

 

Ok. So what happens to a kid between the age of 17 and 18? Why not just give an M rating to everything and up the age to 18?

The only possible reason is a psychological one. M sounds much nicer then Adults Only, thus "allows to sell to a larger audience". Yet it's basically the same thing.

 

The same thing can be found with the MPAA's rating system between what is rated "R" and what is rated "NC-17".

 

 

@ jedigoku: No. Whacking someone with a shovel is very different then shooting and alien with a gun.

[Darth333]

I agree with the ERSB that the game should be rated AO (even if there's no big difference between a 17 yrs old and an 18 yrs old "kid") but as mentionned by LIYAD, not just for the sex minigames but for the whole concept. I don't understand this kill everyone, spill all the blood you want, say all the obscenities that come to your mind to anyone anywhere but when it comes to sex, then it's just wrong...

 

I don't have kids but if I would, this is definitely not a game I would want them to play. I think parents should also be paying more attention to what their kids are playing. Unfortunately, too many parents just buy games and let their children play whatever they want without paying any attention as long as they do not "disturb". There was an 11 yr old kid on the boards sometime ago who mentionned his teacher at school was giving this game as a prize for I don't remember what...that is just totally irresponsible IMHO...

 

By giving the AO rating, it will still not stop what I consider irresponsible parents from buying the game to their kids...but at least it gives them a warning about what they are buying.

[Aash Li]

This new requirement for the game companies to submit what the content of their game is, refers only to whats on the final release of the cd that is being shipped. This will not stop them from making a mod for download.

 

I like the ESRB, and the other ratings systems, but they should only be their as a guide, not as something for the goverment to control. Censorship of any kind is unconstitutional, But with some things, like movies, and games, people allow them because they are actually a good idea...

 

I may not like the crap that RockStar games produces - I have yet to see a game from them Id want to play. But they have a constitutional right to publish whatever they want, though doing so doesnt mean its ethical, or right, or even legal (with the laws that we have now).

 

I too wouldnt want my children playing such games, they just promote racism, disrespect for authority, and arent the characters part of gangs..?

[Bob Lion54]

Unfortunatly, games, movies, music, magazines, ext., are become more mature by the year. I have no problem with the rating system. In fact, I think it's important so parents know what they are buying their kids.

 

The problem I have is when they do buy the game and then comlpain about the content. If the game as an Mature rating, maybe you shouldn't buy it for your 10 year old?

 

I also have a problem when parents complain about a game THAT THE KID DOSEN'T EVEN HAVE.

 

To me, the issue is parenting. I watched a few "R" movies before I was even 10 years old. I don't go around killing people. I repect women. I don't swear ever other word. Why? Because my parents taught me the difference between right and wrong.

 

Censorship is evil. Puting a rating on a game is not. It should be used as a guide for parents, but many would rather the government raise there kids then do it themselves.

 

The televison is not a babysitter.

[RevanA4]

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

 

@ jedigoku: No. Whacking someone with a shovel is very different then shooting and alien with a gun.

 

um you are forgetting you can go around smacking people with your gun and on easy you don't stand a chance of dying when you get wacked by a hunter or a golden elite with a plasma sword cuz I never use my gun on easy unless I'm fighting the flood:p

[MdKnightR]

Sounds like the arguments being circulated in the early 80s when W.A.S.P. released their infamous single "Animal (F*** Like a Beast)" that caused the formation of the PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center). It is not surprising that the former President's wife would follow suit after the antics of the former Vice-President's wife of the same administration when jumping on this bandwagon (for those of you who don't know what I am talking about, Tipper Gore, former-V.P. Al Gore's wife was the spokesperson for the PMRC in the 80s). This kind of censorship is also what got the song Cop Killer removed from Body Count's album in the early 90s. All this uproar will end up doing is making a collectors' item out of the original version and cause mounds of publicity. And, as we all know, any publicity is good publicity.

 

By the way, does anyone own the original PC version of San Andreas that I can buy off of you? J/K

 

MdK

[lukeiamyourdad]

Originally posted by jedigoku

um you are forgetting you can go around smacking people with your gun and on easy you don't stand a chance of dying when you get wacked by a hunter or a golden elite with a plasma sword cuz I never use my gun on easy unless I'm fighting the flood:p

 

 

Pfff. It isn't fun unless my hands are dipped in blood and brains.

 

>_>

 

yeah, GTA has made me into a psycho. I should sue them for a few millions.

 

Back on topic, I think censorship only serves to hide another problem, which in this case is bad parenting.

 

On the ratings system, I'd like them to be a little bit more accurate and informative. The ESRB is pretty accurate, but like I said, what's the point in having an M rating and an AO rating when the difference is ridiculously minimal?

[Achilles]

^^^^

I guess they felt that they wouldn't be cool unless they had an equivalent for NC-17.

[Jeff]

Originally posted by Achilles

^^^^

I guess they felt that they wouldn't be cool unless they had an equivalent for NC-17.

I don't even know the difference between NC-17 and R.

[lukeiamyourdad]

R: Children under 17 must be accompanied by an adult.

 

NC-17: Restricted to adults only. No one under 17 permitted.

[RedHawke]

Originally posted by stingerhs

well, IMHO, i don't think that this ruling will have as much of an effect on the bonus materials as you think. if the bonus materials aren't explicit in nature, then why would the devs have to worry about them?? they only thing they would be worried about would be cut content such as the stuff in San Andreas.

Oh yes it does, the ESRB wants to be able to see everything that game companies are going to release, this would mean extra BS time taken to show them any extra hidden content, models etc... from a corperate perspective this will take valuable time so any extra content would simply be left out... remember rules have to apply to all or none.

 

Example: Using TSL, every piece of extra content would have to be revealed to the ESRB... meaning no droid planet or droid factory modules, no K1 robe models, cutscene Revan Models, etc. All these things are innocent, and give us modders and players tons of pleasure, but would sadly never be released beacuse of the ESRB having to see every piece of inaccessable content, and corperations culling that before release to save time and money.

 

Who loses in the end... we do.

Originally posted by stingerhs

personally, i back such a desicion as it shows that the ESRB does indeed have some backbone.

I disagree, they are overstepping their authority... they are a rating board, not an authority on what is proper to release...

 

Does the ESRB have the right to give the game an Adults Only Rating... Most definately, yes! The whole GTA franchise should have been this rating IMHO.

 

Should they ever have any control over the games released content... Absolutely no! This is what should concern all of us the most.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

Back on topic, I think censorship only serves to hide another problem, which in this case is bad parenting.

 

On the ratings system, I'd like them to be a little bit more accurate and informative. The ESRB is pretty accurate, but like I said, what's the point in having an M rating and an AO rating when the difference is ridiculously minimal?

I couldn't agree more!

[Aash Li]

"Oh yes it does, the ESRB wants to be able to see everything that game companies are going to release, this would mean extra BS time taken to show them any extra hidden content, models etc... from a corperate perspective this will take valuable time so any extra content would simply be left out... remember rules have to apply to all or none.

 

Example: Using TSL, every piece of extra content would have to be revealed to the ESRB... meaning no droid planet or droid factory modules, no K1 robe models, cutscene Revan Models, etc. All these things are innocent, and give us modders and players tons of pleasure, but would sadly never be released beacuse of the ESRB having to see every piece of inaccessable content, and corperations culling that before release to save time and money."

 

I think youre over-hyping this. Just because the esrb board wants to see whats in the CD's doesnt mean that they are gonna automatically say you cant ship such or such thing (which isnt something they should be allowed to do, I agree). It also doesnt mean they are going to require an actual cd, they could be asking for a list, or screenshots or the like... just speculation as the whole thing isnt even a requirement yet.

It also doesnt require the esrb board to release all this information to the public, companies could claim that doing so is jepardizing trade secrets... like with the Infinity Engine...

 

Again, none of this is actual laws (yet) as far as I know.

[stingerhs]

Oh yes it does, the ESRB wants to be able to see everything that game companies are going to release, this would mean extra BS time taken to show them any extra hidden content, models etc... from a corperate perspective this will take valuable time so any extra content would simply be left out... remember rules have to apply to all or none.

thats where planning comes in. if the devs can't plan properly to meet deadlines, than that's their problem due to bad planning.

 

and remember: the ESRB board does not take the entire final version of the game, play it, and then give it a rating. the developers have to send a video of some kind detailing all of the possibly explicit and offensive materials as it is in the game. they do not require the developers to send in materials that are not deemed to be offensive or explicit. therefore, OE would not have had to show the extra content that was included with the game that is currently being exploited as mods.

Who loses in the end... we do.

no, we do not lose. the developers that want to make overly explicit games with even more explicit hidden content lose.

I disagree, they are overstepping their authority... they are a rating board, not an authority on what is proper to release...

then at what point does the government have to step in as an authority?? if the gaming industry cannot regulate itself, then the government will. remember, nothing can truely be regulated without a central authority. either the ESRB can regulate the gaming industry, or the government can regulate it.

Should they ever have any control over the games released content... Absolutely no! This is what should concern all of us the most.

remember: the ESRB is not censoring GTA: San Andreas. it is merely upping the rating to such a degree that retailers are censoring the game. the ESRB does not control the content of the game: it rates the content of the game. censorship of games stems directly from retailers that merely rely on the ESRB rating system.

[Achilles]

Originally posted by stingerhs

remember: the ESRB is not censoring GTA: San Andreas. it is merely upping the rating to such a degree that retailers are censoring the game. the ESRB does not control the content of the game: it rates the content of the game. censorship of games stems directly from retailers that merely rely on the ESRB rating system.

Thank you for reitterating that. I think that point got lost in the conversation at some point.

[Derc]

My my, I'm really losing touch with what's going on in gaming news.

 

Granted, the GTA series(namely, GTA3 and above), were damn fun. Some of the best entertainment that you can get. However, they're games that should've be played by the younger audience, obviously.

 

But this "Hot Coffee" controversy really begs the question to just how far Rockstar was going to go. I heard they really pushed the limit with Manhunt, which was just violence for the sake of violence, but now for sexual content... It's heavily implied in the GTA games, but a minigame would be absolutely ridiculous.

 

...wtf.

 

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

Back on topic, I think censorship only serves to hide another problem, which in this case is bad parenting.

Wow I never thought of it that way. Awesome insight.

[montnoir]

Whether it is ethical or not people will always be watching movies like Scarface, Goodfellas, The Godfather, Heat, etc. and at the same time people will play games like GTA, Street Fighter, Tekken, Doom, etc. So the validity of the existance of such movies, books, music and games is not an issue.

 

The weirdness ensues when the glorifying murder, gang-violence, drug-using, car-stealing and other vile anti-social and immoral acts are regarded A-OK by the likes such as Wal-Mart but the exact same game, with sexual innuendo is considered dangerous and offensive... (and yeah I am talking about GTA SA if I wasn't clear enough)

 

In this case I agree with Rockstar Games. The "dangerous" content was locked and never intended to be used during gameplay. A third-party program needed to be installed thus breaking the EULA. So I don't see how the developers could be held responsible as the contract for their program was broken by the user with usage of third-party software.

 

I am also willing to bet that if the mod had uncovered a say "snorting-coke" mini-game or "decapitate your enemies" mini-game there would never have been such a politically-correct scream about it and the game would have kept its M rating.

 

 

 

Other than that I agree with mostly everyone else, that the problem is parenting and not the games, music or movies.

 

I understand Hilary as she feels the authorities have a responsibility to the people to inform them. I understand the people who don't know much about computers and have no idea what a mod is and by extension I must agree that those people must be informed in a manner or other.

 

Unfortunately those people are also mostly narrowminded, ready to attack anything that they feel threaten the well-being of them and their youth, without a clear image of where that danger comes from, what it means and what could be done about it in other ways than attacking others.

 

/rant

 

 

I am also aware that I am making my point through generalisation. So I must beg forgiveness to that 1 person in a 100 who does not fall under my generalisation.