Author Topic: That whole GTA ruckus (Read 23773 times)

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #50 on:** July 20, 2005, 04:37:21 AM »

Basically they effectively made the rating M 18 and up not 17.

I personally don't mind this move at all. It just means retail stores actually have to respect the rating and watch who they are selling the games to.

The movie industry had this problem for awhile. Movies were rated R (restricted) but nobody cared about the rating and theaters were letting anyone into see any movie. Now, they don't do that as much. Sure you can still get in, but theaters are actually actively trying to prevent it.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #51 on:** July 20, 2005, 08:34:02 AM »

But that's enforcement on the part of the MPAA which says "either you respect the ratings or you'll get your license revoked!". The problem with the law is that it would set a precedent, it would prove that sales restrictions do not qualify as obstacles to free speech. That is a severe threat, any unliked book could be labelled 18+ and the checks so costy that no retailer will bother with stocking books that are rated 18. Usually slippery slopes hold no water but in the legal system a precedent can be VERY dangerous. That's why companies always settle, because a lawsuit won against them would result in a precedent.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #52 on:** July 20, 2005, 11:42:23 AM »

KDR: Any unliked book? Whoo, there are standards to what positions itself as an M-rated game, or in your analog a book. I don't think the government should be in charge of the rating system. No one is going to look at Harry Potter can try out it should be rated M, because it has witchcraft in it. Instead, a panel is still going to look at the content and ask: Does this contain mature language, No. Does it contain violence: Mild, Does it contain sex: No. Ok it is a teen book or whatever. I just think the government needs to make sure it is enforced BECAUSE unlike the MPAA who is enforcing their rating system the ESRB isn't.

Perhaps its because the ESRB never had that power. It was created only to appease people that saw game content as becoming a problem without really solving the issue. Now, the game industry either needs to actually step up and create real solutions, or watch the government do it for them. (Which I support they have the right to do.)

Companies also settle because it is more COSTLY to go to court. You have to pay lawyer fees and more, and you don't always know how the courts are going to rule, because courts don't just interpret the law in more. They rule on the law depending on what they think is fair and right. Very scary.

Famicom · « **Reply #53 on:** July 20, 2005, 02:08:24 PM »

Their worst nightmare happened. Shouldn't be that big of a deal though, until they get the re-release out at least.

stevey · « **Reply #54 on:** July 20, 2005, 02:29:05 PM »

This mark the end for rockstar because all old copy will not be sold in all store ranging from gamestop to staples because no one will carry an AO game and the reprint will cost them billion of dollar (that plus the fine and people sueing). That in death they going to make the vg sell there soel to the gov. bad time to come bad time THE 1ST SEAL HAS NOW BROKING!!!

kirby_killer_dedede · « **Reply #55 on:** July 20, 2005, 03:12:56 PM »

Stevey, you realize that Clinton was a great leader, right? Probably the best President of your time. I mean he had personal issues, I'll agree, but that didn't influence the way he handled the country, and you're a numb-nut to sit there flaming people for partaking in a noble cause. (Okay, his wife's kind of going crazy with it, but no one here can deny that ESRB's not doing their job)

Politics aside, yeah, Rockstar is the total anti-tiku. I'll admit GTA's one of my guilty pleasures but...seriously, the ESRB should have slapped an AO rating on there even without this little coffee thing, but probably didn't as not to hinder game sales. And this...not many stores around here (Dallas, TX) impose that "no M-rated games to minors" rule, so this is like selling pornography to little kids. My six-year-old cousin has (and worships) GTA: Vice City, and he's seriously is the most violent child EVAHR. And he laughs when someone says "Lemme touch it" or something because of the obvious innuendo. Yes, that's what America's come to.

PUT IT ON TEH KUBE

hillary in 2008

stevey · « **Reply #56 on:** July 20, 2005, 03:44:41 PM »

"Stevey, you realize that Clinton was a great leader, right? Probably the best President of your time. I mean he had personal issues, I'll agree, but that didn't influence the way he handled the country, and you're a numb-nut to sit there flaming people for partaking in a noble cause. (Okay, his wife's kind of going crazy with it, but no one here can deny that ESRB's not doing their job)"

Don't get me wrong I LOVE BILL CLINTON he was the best world leader since G.W. or ever. I just making fun of his love of humping thing gee gee gee goo oh!

"but...seriously, the ESRB should have slapped an AO rating on there even without this little coffee thing, but probably didn't as not to hinder game sales. "

You don't know the esrb well do you? Rockstar has to give video of the game wose stuff and ask for a rate this case M the ESRB just says yes or to it they dont give the rate or DOA would have an T insted of a M even with the bong bong bong.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #57 on:** July 20, 2005, 03:55:10 PM »

Kirby: I don't know if I would call Clinton a great leader...for instance he really screwed up this whole terror matter. He was handed Bin Laden and he refused to take him into custody. Several more things prove that he actually did VERY LITTLE as President.

Still politics aside. I do back this movement. Business must prove they are willing to regulate and be responsible themselves, and if they are not, then it is up to government to step in. I just wish this was settled as a States Issue and not wholey federally, but it is an issue that couldn't easily be solved that way.

I also agree that Grand Theft Auto deserved an AO rating when you read the describtion of rating systems. Or they should actually make rated M restricted to 18 years only and then make AO rated games for 21 and up and those games are any games that include sex, nudity, or sexual conduct.

stevey · « **Reply #58 on:** July 20, 2005, 04:06:54 PM »

"I don't know if I would call Clinton a great leader...for instance he really screwed up this whole terror matter. He was handed Bin Laden and he refused to take him into custody. Several more things prove that he actually did VERY LITTLE as President."

We did know man we did know. and he made the US people and gov. and the world Ri¢h $$$ and the interweb BIG.

"Or they should actually make rated M restricted to 18 years only and then make AO rated games for 21 and up and those games are any games that include sex, nudity, or sexual conduct."

No M ok tv uses M too. they need to add a 14/15 rating and a R rating and bump AO and rename E10+ to P(re)T

jasonditz · « **Reply #59 on:** July 20, 2005, 04:11:16 PM »

You guys'll change your tunes when Hello Kitty Roller Rescue comes with a patch that features a gimp suit and a "back massager".

kirby_killer_dedede · « **Reply #60 on:** July 20, 2005, 05:20:45 PM »

He put the AL GORE in ALGORITHMS.

The only reason the ESRB's even putting an AO on there NOW is because of the publicity of the situation. I mean, Playboy Mansion and The Guy Game are M-rated...

nickmitch · « **Reply #61 on:** July 20, 2005, 05:39:06 PM »

Well does Playboy Mansion have sex in it? Or does it have scantaly clad girls with large boobies?

And AO should really be for 21+. Because if one game is 17+ and another is 18+ then what's the point? Alittle extra content and I have to wait four months 'till my birthday. One year is not going to be a big deal to people. The only thing enforcing the AO rating is the fact that most retailers won't carry the game. However, that could be enough. . .

bustin98 · « **Reply #62 on:** July 20, 2005, 06:34:49 PM »

I'm wondering why "God of War" hasn't been mentioned. I haven't played it myself, but isn't there a sex game where you have to please two women at the same time? You'd think that idea is more hedonistic than bumping and grinding in a hidden game that can't be accessed without a cheat device or download.

And personally, as a web programmer, I hate extra code. I think all extraneous code should be dropped from any game. But thats just my anal habits.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #63 on:** July 21, 2005, 12:49:11 AM »

TVman: I think they wanted M to be 18+ but retailers won't carry anything labelled "18" and so they had to lower M to 17. Ao is 18 because that's the age porn is sold at. You can't tell someone "you'reold enough for hardcore bondage porn but a videogame with softcore stuff in it has to wait". The only reason the drinking age is at 21 is because you start driving with 18 and they hope that by the time you're 21 you'll have learned enough about driving that you won't do DUI.

bustin: You're a... web programmer? Have you ever worked on anything approaching the complexity of a game for 60-80 hours a week? At that pace they'll just turn a branch into if (false) instead of commenting out the whole function, changing the headers and all the calls. Since there's no standardized formats there's no software that'll check for you which assets are used and stuff like the nude skins some joker threw in there three months ago get pressed on the final disc. When there's a deadline approaching you don't go "hey, let's clean up all the unused stuff", you go "Did QA approve? Okay, then throw it all on a disc and send it to the presses".

Spak-Spang: Who defines what content is bad for the children? When or how can those definitions change? Could anyone decide that something isn't suitable for anyone and completely ban it? If the president wants to decide about things like homosexual (why is this board blocking g-y?) marriage and abortion, would you put it beyond him to define "anti-religious or unpatriotic material" as unsuitable for anyone under 18, 21, whatever? If congress agrees with him, couldn't they dangerously curtail the right to free speech?

stevey · « **Reply #64 on:** July 21, 2005, 05:10:12 AM »

"I'm wondering why "God of War" hasn't been mentioned. I haven't played it myself, but isn't there a sex game where you have to please two women at the same time?"

That because it's a good game

duh.

"Well does Playboy Mansion have sex in it? "

yep you get to that in 5 min after turn it on oh!

Ian Sane · « **Reply #65 on:** July 21, 2005, 07:06:20 AM »

How is this new AO rating going to affect used sales of San Andreas? The old copies still say 'M' on them which is technically misleading. Are stores allowed to have "inaccurate" ratings on used copies of the game? Maybe Rockstar should give stores AO stickers to put on used copies.

I'm not happy that a few politicians can throw a hissy fit and the ESRB immediately caves. In this case it's a little acceptable since the content in question was "hidden" from the ESRB. But I don't like the precedence this sets. I don't want to see games that don't deserve it get their ratings changed. What if Zelda is rated T but then in one scene there's a drop of blood and some parents freak out and it gets changed to M? It's an extreme scenario but it's one I don't want to see. The ESRB essentially just gave politicians the power to set the ratings as they see fit.

Famicom · « **Reply #66 on:** July 21, 2005, 08:11:10 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
How is this new AO rating going to affect used sales of San Andreas? The old copies still say 'M' on them which is technically misleading. Are stores allowed to have "inaccurate" ratings on used copies of the game? Maybe Rockstar should give stores AO stickers to put on used copies.

I'd imagine if the used shops have policies against selling AO games, they'll just not sell them. If they don't, they can just hike up the price "RARE BANNED EDITION".

ib2kool4u912 · « **Reply #67 on:** July 21, 2005, 08:39:57 AM »

I like what Penny Arcade has to say on the subject.

Especially the first sentence "It's unfortunate that in order to defend videogames, it usually means you're defending Rockstar specifically."

stevey · « **Reply #68 on:** July 21, 2005, 08:44:17 AM »

"What if Zelda is rated T but then in one scene there's a drop of blood and some parents freak out and it gets changed to M? "

Have you ever beat OoT

vudu · « **Reply #69 on:** July 21, 2005, 08:54:15 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: TVman
And AO should really be for 21+. Because if one game is 17+ and another is 18+ then what's the point?

As far as movies goes, 'R' is no one under 17 allowd without a parent and 'NC-17' is no one under 17 period. Same thing.

Or is 'NC-17' no one under 18? I can't remember.

nickmitch · « **Reply #70 on:** July 21, 2005, 09:57:44 AM »

Vudu:Nah, you we right the first time. NC-17=No Children under the age of 17

And well I guess that I can see how M and AO are effective ratings.

Ian: If that ever happens, you can rst assured that the parent will recieve a heathy dose of vitamin Back of the Hand or vitamin BotH; short.

couchmonkey · « **Reply #71 on:** July 21, 2005, 10:00:06 AM »

In retrospect, I don't think the game deserves an AO rating for the hidden sex games, and I do think it deserved one for the violence in the first place.

Granted, I may not have seen everything the game has in it, but as I understand, the characters were clothed in the un-modified sex game. From what I've seen the things they can do are pretty suggestive, but while wearing clothes, I don't think it's as bad. I think there's similar stuff in the Playboy Mansion game. Had Rockstar been up-front and given that content to the ESRB from the start, I wonder if it would have gotten an AO rating? I'm not knowledgable enough about any of these games to say, but it's an interesting question.

I think Ian's point is valid, although I doubt it will be an issue. I think the ESRB caved in specifically in this situation because the content was hidden from them. Typically game companies are supposed to submit the "worst" content of the game to the ESRB for review, and I'm sure that if the ESRB had ruled an M rating knowing that the sex game was in there, they'd have stuck to it...but my guess is the sex game was either never reviewed by the ESRB, or it was reviewed and they told Rockstar to take it out if it wanted an M rating.

Donutt007 · « **Reply #72 on:** July 21, 2005, 12:56:08 PM »

Now, here's what I don't understand. The content is being able to unlock in the PC version, yet the concole versions were rated AO.

And, according to the end user agreement you are not allowed to change anything on the game, right? So they left a little something extra in there, but didn't make it able to access it. Now if you do download a patch or a mod NOT made by rockstar you are breaking the end user agreement!

What about the sims, you can download mods to get nudity, yet the game is rated T.

This is just a way to get the games out of stores. Best Buy, Circuit City, Walmart, etc. does not carry anything that has an AO rating, they treat it like it's a XXX movie. The government is not allowed to censor us, yet they are allowed to make the game a little less available....hmmm sounds like censorship to me, they just do it in a different way.

IceCold · « **Reply #73 on:** July 21, 2005, 03:09:09 PM »

"What if Zelda is rated T but then in one scene there's a drop of blood and some parents freak out and it gets changed to M?"

Haha - remember the Ganondorf fight in the golden cartrige where he spit out RED blood (the humanity!) and everyone went berserk so in the later editions (not gold) they changed it to green blood?

The ESRB will cave in every time under this pressure - it just isn't strong enough. Yea, by doing so they look stupid and weak, but they had no other choice.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #74 on:** July 21, 2005, 05:48:10 PM »

Yeah, but if the government got behind the ESRB and enforced it...and gave it the ESRB more backing to give it more power, then it might be in better shape.

News:

Author Topic: That whole GTA ruckus (Read 23773 times)