Jump to navigation
Advertisement

Hot Coffee could burn mod makers tagopt_brief-feature_type-

tagopt_brief-feature_type- by Tom Bramwell

13 July, 2005

We were in a hotel room with Rockstar yesterday. "Hot Coffee" was neither served nor offered.

Rubbish intro out of the way - we were sitting here earlier thinking about all this excitement surrounding unlockable sex mini-games in GTA: San Andreas, which have been dubbed Hot Coffee for reasons we can't be bothered to look up, and something crossed our minds. A bad thing. A thing that, were it to play out, would be bad news for gamers, mod makers, developers and publishers, who are probably already exchanging nervous glances over the ubiquitous water cooler regardless. And yet, at the same time, a thing that's not completely unimaginable.

While we'd imagine that vocal proponents of modding, like Half-Life developer Valve and the Doom scribes at id Software, are unlikely to change any of their plans in light of this latest storm-in-a-coffee-mug media explosion, the screaming politicians might make an impression on smaller publishers and developers. Because right now there's little distinction between whether Hot Coffee was in the game already, or created by someone else.

And those publishing folks could be troubled by the idea of being lambasted by the international press, or denied certification by ratings boards that parents are increasingly being instructed to consider when buying games for those under the age of 18, or perhaps even worse.

Politicians - particularly American ones, oddly enough - regularly use videogames as a tool to find some moral high ground and win some votes. Rockstar has made these sorts of headlines before with Vice City's notorious "Kill all the Haitians" line and Manhunt's moral-compass-on-spin-cycle antics. Most recently Eidos was in the news after a US senator hurled mud at its forthcoming cops-and-robbers title 25 to Life for its cop-killing aspects. Never mind the fact the game wasn't finished.

'Hot Coffee could burn mod makers' Screenshot 1

In the most extreme cases these campaigns have led to games being withdrawn and remastered with offending material cut, or denied certification, and this can be an expensive business for those involved. Litigation is rare, but as the Manhunt case arguably proved, a lot of the concepts involved baffle and divide in equal measure, and the potential for conflict - whether legal or in public relations terms - is often there even if most gamers could highlight the gaps in logic within seconds. Politicians are good at making the average Joe see this stuff in the worst possible light, and a lot of the mainstream media will race to sensationalise it too.

There's obviously a temptation to dismiss the Hot Coffee hullabaloo because the content was likely already hidden on the disc (Rockstar currently disputes this), reasoning that that's a situation we're unlikely to see too often. But the thing that strikes this writer is that nobody on the shouty side of the debate is all that interested in whether it was there to begin with or not. Even assuming Rockstar's completely blameless on this front, our worry is that the media and mud-slinging politicians who are seizing upon this won't accept that as a defence, and will start to hold publishers responsible for what people do with their games whether they add components themselves or not.

How long before mods in general bear the brunt of this?

People can do a lot with games these days. We've been playing with Garry's Mod for Half-Life 2 a lot lately. It lets you deposit virtually any object from the game in an enclosed play area and then manipulate it using things like balloons, nail guns and the game's weapons. Virtually anything is possible - you could theoretically build a cross, drop Half-Life 2's female lead Alyx into the play area, and then nail her to it and do goodness only knows what else. The wrong people will spot this sooner or later, particularly if this lack of distinction between user-made content and hidden developer-made content continues.

'Hot Coffee could burn mod makers' Screenshot 2

This could be a massive problem for mod makers. If people outside the games industry start holding publishers accountable for the things people can do with their software, they may want to avoid that problem entirely by restricting access to their source code. Rockstar's already planning to do that, it said this week. Given the way the above example would sit with the majority of Christians, you'd be able to appreciate their concern.

One solution you might consider is obviously moderation. Microsoft is bound to be thinking about that this week, as one of the key components of its Xbox 360 online offering is a "mod market" affair that lets players resell their own user-made content to one another, and that could become a focus for excitable media outlets in the coming days. The assumption must be that there's a degree of moderation involved in Microsoft's offering anyway, but how many other companies can afford to do that? And what if the American ERSB sets a precedent with San Andreas of re-rating the game because of mod content? There'd be problems left, right and centre. With PC games, which traditionally sell poorly compared to their console cousins, the returns probably wouldn't justify the costs in most cases.

And if you think this all sounds quite far-fetched, consider one worrying parallel - between Rockstar's current position and that of Grokster, the company the Recording Industry Association of America recently finished dragging through the courts because its peer-to-peer software can be used to distribute things illegally without any restriction. Videogames can be used to do horrendous, even illegal things without any restriction, even if the majority of mods aspire to do nothing more than provide harmless entertainment to people who've exhausted the stuff that came out of the box. Okay, that was a different situation involving copyright and the infamous DMCA, but it does show that American courts are willing to listen to these kinds of arguments.

With any luck, our silly little fears will never amount to anything. We hope, for the sake of the thousands of amateur game designers whose creative outlet could come under the spotlight through all of this, that someone cries pot, kettle, black on those sensationalising Hot Coffee. Because if mods were to be wiped away or severely restricted, the ramifications for game development in general would be extreme.

Advertisement

Are you excited about Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-30 of 30 in total

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
ssuellid
13/07/05 @ 14:14
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If the courts can find the file sharing companies guilty for the actions of their tools users then I won't be suprised if games companies get blamed for the actions of the modders.
ralphwolfenstein
13/07/05 @ 14:34
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I agree - it's a silly little fear. Reduced to its basics, your argument seems to suggest that, because someone could take a print of the Mona Lisa and draw on comedy breasts and a moustache, maker pens could be banned. Or that, at the very least, the Da Vinci estate may restrict access to his source-paints...

I think it's paranoid scare-mongering - for all the fuss that's being kicked off, no-one is going to legislate against what will effectivley be regarded as freedom of expression in the US

If the distinction between whether it was already in-game and unlockable, or a genuine mod hasn't arisen yet, it will do

Edit - I meant to clarify, I agree with the assertion that it's a silly little fear. I don't agree with ssuelid :P
Edited 1 times, most recently on 13/07/05 @ 15:36
Bezzy
13/07/05 @ 14:35
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I could do some pretty offensive imagery with photoshop. It's all protected. It's the same with games. I thought that the NCSoft ruling on the Marvel IP infringements already gave this precedence?

I guess it won't stop people whining about people being able to do dispicable things in games, purely because it's their choice to do so.
Mugwum [staff]
13/07/05 @ 14:49
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
ralphwolfenstein - Nice dissection. I agree it'd be bloody ridiculous, but there's a lot more bloody ridiculousness flying around these days than ever before and I do worry about it. It wasn't my intention to monger the scare, just vent.
Pike
13/07/05 @ 15:13
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Interesting article. However I think you overstate the implications of the Grokster case. The ruling made it quite clear that it wasn't enough that a certain product *could* be used for illegal purposes, for the company that produced it to be held liable. The producer of the product should activley have encouraged that illegal use of their product as well.

More on that issue here.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 13/07/05 @ 16:14
ralphwolfenstein
13/07/05 @ 15:24
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"It wasn't my intention to monger the scare"

a phrase I think I'll be giving a new home to...
Strawp
13/07/05 @ 15:42
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's called Hot Coffee because in the game if you "win" at a date, she asks you in for "coffee". Then they go in and move furniture about or something, I don't really understand, but it sounds like hard work.
Tyronne
13/07/05 @ 16:38
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I was going to say something along the lines of my joystick has not seen this kind of violent misuse since daley thompson on the speccy, but thought it best not to as those kinda wank gags are very old hat.
siro
14/07/05 @ 00:49
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
They should change the User agreement so that it forbids to put in anything which isn't conform to the age recommendation. If someone doesn't conform to the rule, sue their asses off, especially if it has to the leave the shelves. Sounds a bit harsh, but this incident could become a huge problem for rock star, so it's not too drastic, I'd say.
3william56
14/07/05 @ 05:41
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
There's a clear difference between Grokster and modding. Although Grokster, KaZaA and the rest have possible legitimate use, the clear intent (and the clear majority of the real world use) was distributing illegal copies of someone else's material. The "nod and wink" gee look - folks are being naughty with our stuff defense when it was plainly obvious what was going to happen was no good - it's called Connaivance (spell?) - the legal term for turning a deliberate blind eye to illegal activity. Grokster et. al. are the same as folks wanting to sell machine guns - sure you could use them for target practice, but the majority won't, so they are rightly banned. Anything else is just tight ar$es trying to justify them nicking stuff they don't want to pay for.

RalphW - the sale of spray cans and glue is restricted precisely because of what folks *can* use them for, legit uses aside.

Mod capability is very different, just as DIY tools at B&Q are different. The INTENT of the mod capability is clearly not for illegal or immoral use, and only a tiny minority of sads will do something dodgy with it. Real world hammers and nails aren't restricted just because someone *could* make a dodgy crucifix or murder someone.

It does mean however that we, as a community, have to grow up, take responsibility and start putting pressure on the creepy little gits who do this stuff, and start to police ourselves before someone has to do it for us. We need to oppose (even just with a flame or snotty post) on socially unacceptable activity, not snigger like crappy little schoolboys.
Psi
14/07/05 @ 05:42
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
what complete twats

anyway why do they have a problem with kids re-inacting the beatifull act of love making on a computer game but not when you shoot the bitch afterwards?
Strawp
14/07/05 @ 08:06
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
anyway why do they have a problem with kids re-inacting the beatifull act of love making on a computer game but not when you shoot the bitch afterwards?

What a fantastically good point.
Ponsonby
14/07/05 @ 11:38
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This whole scenario is rather worrying. What really really gets me annoyed is that in the GTA games you can maim, burn, shoot, buy guns and burry people in portaloos but the thing that gets people seriously agitated (more then the above things) is some sexual interaction.
I felt this way about the Janet Jackson thing - one shot of her boob and the Country is up in arms yet if there had been an advert (and I have no idea if guns are advertised on TV over there – I would hope not) for a 9mm pistol for "Hunting and Home Defense" no one would have batted an eyelid.
I like the GTA games, I think they are some of the best satire written about the US with the parody of some aspects of their culture being refreshing from the usual “US is great!” type of thing but people rarely see that side of things and concentrate on the violence.

I can only assume that politicians assume that video games = children which just goes to show how relevant there views on this subject are.


All very worrying for the future
Feanor
14/07/05 @ 12:52
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"And what if the American ERSB sets a precedent with San Andreas of re-rating the game because of mod content?"

If the ESRB re-rates GTA:SA then it will be because Rockstar did not provide full disclosure. And honestly, I'll eat my hat if the sex mini-game code wasn't already on the disk.

"(and I have no idea if guns are advertised on TV over there – I would hope not)"

I've lived in America for over two years and I haven't seen an TV ad for guns yet, but I do laugh when I'm driving down the street and see a shop with "GUNS" written in 6 foot high letters on its roof. And I don't live in the South or a small town either, hehe.
Troutio
14/07/05 @ 13:51
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So, we've established that American politicians are right-wing loonies with no idea what they are talking about. Next?

Bezzy's Photoshop argument could as easily be applied to MS Office. Imagine if I used Word to write an incendiary tract, or Excel to keep track of my drug-dealing profits?
asandbrook
14/07/05 @ 15:41
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm in absolute agreement with 3wiliam56. We (e.g. the 'video gaming community') shouldn't have let it get to the stage that ignorant politicians start carping on about sex and violence in video games. We should have shooed all this top shelf sniggering adolescent behaviour off into a corner and given it a good spanking before it started spreading like a renegade evil wildfire. But seriously...aaaargh...I keep harping on about this in various forums - when will the gaming community's attitudes really grow up beyond the pubescent stage? The fact that this game should be being played by over 18s means that for 95 percent of us the hot coffee mod should be of little or no interest and therefore left to rot in a seedy little forum...I sincerely hope.
ralphwolfenstein
14/07/05 @ 17:22
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"It does mean however that we, as a community, have to grow up, take responsibility and start putting pressure on the creepy little gits who do this stuff, and start to police ourselves before someone has to do it for us. We need to oppose (even just with a flame or snotty post) on socially unacceptable activity, not snigger like crappy little schoolboys."

I'm sorry - in case you haven’t noticed, we live in a society that celebrates freedom of expression. I don’t actually want militant moralists who clearly haven’t read their Voltaire dictating what kind of mod is or isn’t ‘socially acceptable’

BMX XXX, Leisure Suit Larry and many more – all seedy, lowest common denominator dross in my eyes. But there’s smut in every form of media, and trying to suppress this kind of content, no matter how distasteful it may seem to you, would be the greatest illustration of how ‘immature’ the games industry is. Why should we shy away from it?

The challenge is rather to educate the public/politicians and make them realise that, just like any other form of media that is regulated by a ratings board, some video ‘games’ are not children’s toys and may contain adult content. That’s the only statement that needs to be made – I don’t have to apologise for my industry because someone hacks a clusterfuck into San Andreas any more than the film industry has to cover its blushes when Saving Ryan’s Privates goes on sale…

”RalphW - the sale of spray cans and glue is restricted precisely because of what folks *can* use them for, legit uses aside

I presume you mean restricted by age. So you suggest a system whereby modding tools are age-rated as well, so that only older, more mature members of society will use them, thus ensuring our precious games are only subjected to aesthetically and morally enlightened modification? Somewhere I can hear Trey Parker laughing…

My point was that, despite Tom’s concerns, I don’t think there will be any long-term fall-out from this. If the content was already in the game, then Rockstar have the ESRB to answer for, and should rightly get their knuckles rapped for not disclosing the game’s full content. That the American moral compass is utterly bankrupt is not an issue – if they think sexual content rather than mass murder is more deserving of an Adult rating, so be it. The BBFC has predictably shown little concern.

If it’s a pure hack, it is the equivalent behaviour of the Mona Lisa example – although because it’s now freely available on the net, perhaps you can add that after defacing the said print, our Chapman wannabe photocopied it 1,000 times and handed it out on the underground to passers by – and as such, the ‘games community’ has nothing to be ashamed of


flippet
14/07/05 @ 19:45
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
You use Excel to keep track of your drug dealing profits???! Good God!

What kind of a morally depraved savage are you?

Quattro Pro would be much more sensible, sort it out.
Kengro
14/07/05 @ 23:31
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Only in america... If you send the chainsaw massacre on telly they won't mind. But if you show a nude woman... All hell break loose...
CHRIST... It's only a little fuck**g
I wish those morons that have nothing else to do than to scream over theyr heads about this would get a real life... Or die... I really want them to die
Routeone
15/07/05 @ 03:58
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
America is a bit crazy when it comes to that kind of thing. The Janet Jackson fiasco got hundreds of thousands of complaints but I remember an incident over here in the Uk not so long ago. The Eurovision song contest qualifiers were on, being watched by millions and one of the singers breasts was exposed, plus it was a lot worse then "Janetgate" but yet there was only a total of 7 complaints. Is sex and nudity really such a bad thing? Another example is that Niptuck show. It's allowed to show the most gruesome operations but can't even show a nipple, I just find it quite funny.
Maybe if Americans had lots of sex on their tv then they'd make love with someone rather than shooting them.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 15/07/05 @ 05:01
asandbrook
15/07/05 @ 11:05
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"I'm sorry - in case you haven’t noticed, we live in a society that celebrates freedom of expression. I don’t actually want militant moralists who clearly haven’t read their Voltaire dictating what kind of mod is or isn’t ‘socially acceptable’"

Which is why I'm not advocating some kind of wholesale banning of this sort of thing - I'm more pro a kind of moral righteous bullying.

Stop hiding behind the 'freedom of expression' excuse - because that's what it's become nowadays - a convenient excuse. The hot coffee mod is for geekzoid losers to damage their wrists over...and that's pathetic, let's come out and say it - it's pathetic and I, as a gamer, don't want to be even vaguely associated with that kind of freakish behaviour. If the games industry would police itself more rigorously then hopefully this kind of filth could be pushed back right up to the top shelf where it belongs, before politicians start carping on about it and tarring us all with the same brush.

Re: the mention of Voltaire - oh dear.
Khanivor
15/07/05 @ 11:13
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think the article ignores the extra sales the publicity will generate. Imagine you are a small developer with a small game fighting to make itself known to the gaming public wuithout megabucks marketing. Whip up a 'mod' and 'release' it to the public. Phone some twatish politician. Watch them get your game on prime-time news.

Profit.

The costs of altering the game to regain an M rating would be negligible in comparrison to all that extra moolah, and made easy enough because you constructed the whole thing in the first place
ralphwolfenstein
15/07/05 @ 11:14
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"So, actually, the moral majority may have a point here.. Rockstar appear to have built in a feature, then locked it out, hiding it from the ESRB evaluators...

Yup, if the assets were already there then Rockstar have deceived the ESRB - you have to disclose everything that a user might legitimately uncover. The fact that it required someone to dig them out isn't much of a defence - why were they put on there in the first place if they weren't meant to be found? The easist thing would be to delete them surely. It's a tacit admission that the hot coffee scenes were intended to be seen, and that breaks ESRB guidelines

Of course, if they weren't there in the first place, the whole thing is a non-issue and Rockstar have just scooped $K's of free PR instead of just having to pay a fine for it

Either way, cheap at the price

Edit: more posts snuck in...
Edited 1 times, most recently on 15/07/05 @ 12:17
asandbrook
15/07/05 @ 11:35
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"A sequence in the game where you have sex with your girlfriend is "filth"?"

Picture the scene - an adolescent male or grown man sat in front of his tv furiously tapping the joypad, watching computer game characters have sex. Do I find this just a little bit filthy? Yes.

" "Yes, its important to get back to the much more acceptable elements in GTA, like the bit where you shoot the police officer in the face with an uzi, so that you can go back to clubbing the now long dead corpse of the hooker unmolested, to "see how much blood you can get out of her" "

So you're suggesting that we're employing double standards here? You do have a good point here - but then I do have a general beef with GTA as a whole here as well, although I don't want to open up that whole can of worms. (And yes I am a 'normal' gamer and yes I have played GTA: SA and took it back for a whole host of reasons, and no I do not read the Daily Mail). My main concern, however, is that games ratings are just not being adhered to properly and that parents show sod all interests in what their sons are playing. In fact I think we should all just blame the parents and be done with it...

" I'm also curious to know how you would suggest the games industry would "police itself more rigorously"? "

I don't know, I really don't. It's a very tough issue as the internet as a whole at the moment seems so hard to police. The rise of piracy and fundamental theft of intellectual property on the internet seems to be absolutely rife and nobody seems to have come up with a solution just yet.
ralphwolfenstein
15/07/05 @ 12:01
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
In answer to asandbrook…

There are two scenarios here:

1 – The content was already there, the ‘mod’ is actually an unlock-able.

Rockstar were obviously ‘wrong’ not to disclose this to the ratings board, although whatever fine they receive is likely to be insignificant compared to the extra sales this PR will generate. They’re arguably acted irresponsibly and drawn more fire from the screwed up American moral majority which, as an industry, we could have done without. As such, I think they deserve a tidy slapping from the industry. But had they disclosed the feature up front, they should have every right to sell it (subject to the correct rating of course).

“Hopefully this kind of filth could be pushed back right up to the top shelf where it belongs” – well yes, that’s what a top shelf is for. We also have a TV watershed, so Channel 4 can show us Makosi with her snatch out, and a BBFC ratings system designed to prevent 10 year olds from watching 9 Songs. Now, despite being a person who watches the Channel 4 news, I don’t feel I’m being “tarred by the same brush” as someone who watches Eurotrash. I’m not ashamed to be seen purchasing a DVD from HMV just because across the street a sex shop might be selling a similar shaped DVD laced with EVIL, FILTHY PORN.

There’s smut in every medium. It has an audience. Gaming is not your personal, private bastion of decency surrounded by a sea of vice. If you don’t want to be associated with what you regard as ‘freakish behaviour’ then… don’t be. As soon as you single out one element you find distasteful – like sexual content – and say that we should, as an industry, stamp out this ‘filth’ you reveal yourself to be a moral bigot. You’re reacting to an aspect that your moral compass shies away from, and demanding that we should all share your moral standpoint. Once sexual content was ‘banned’ from games, the next logical step would be to remove all violent content – arguably much less morally edifying. Would you support that?

Scenario 2 – it’s a genuine hack

Then there is no issue. Yes the person who did it probably enjoys the odd episode of South Park, but I don’t think that’s a capital offence. It’s not the industry’s job to police people who use their products, any more than a bookshop should spy on their customers to make sure they’ve not defaced any of the pages of the books they bought…

“The hot coffee mod is for geekzoid losers to damage their wrists over...and that's pathetic” Well, I tend to agree with this. Why not just buy a porno?

“Re: the mention of Voltaire - oh dear.” Yup. I did that, somewhat tongue in cheek, to amuse myself. I’m sure you know the quote I’m referring to. Do you understand it? And if you do, why do you not agree with it?
Edited 1 times, most recently on 15/07/05 @ 13:06
asandbrook
15/07/05 @ 13:32
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
In reply to ralphwolfenstein:

Re: Voltaire: a) No idea what quote you're referring to - I haven't gone within 40 feet of Voltaire since school and my cravat's packed away in the loft - maybe the one about not agreeing with somebody but defending their right to voice that opinion anyway? b) Anyway whatever it is - I don't agree with it. The writings of Voltaire, Diderot and co lead those nutters the other side of the channel to rename the calendar and look where it got them...it's all that garlic - I think it sets them off.

Re: filth in videogaming - this is a very sound point. Should we automatically demand all our videogames are 100% 'socially acceptable'? Maybe not, actually. I suppose that the reason I feel tarred by the same brush is that videogaming is still very much misunderstood outside of the videogaming community. If one says one watches tv (if one speaks like the Queen), then people do not assume that one watch hardcore porn BUT if you say you play computer games then assumptions are immediately made because they know so little about videogames. I suppose then, that the real problem, (I think I'm actually just arguing with myself here) comes down to a lack of appreciation and understanding from those who are alien to videogames e.g. those damned evil parents...

And the reason why it's more important that parents know plenty about videogames rather than about any other hobby is that they now form such an enormous chunk of a child's formative years. And we come back to the old chestnut of games rated Mature or 18 being played by 12 year old kids and parents not even knowing or caring. Which is why we must all bow down to my moral judgments - for they are right.

Re: violence vs sex - which is mostest evilest: big can of worms here...really big worms, worms as big as snakes. Super snake worms, if you will. I suppose the real fear with both of these is that young'uns are getting their hands on a product that allows them to be the active participant in these acts, rather than just viewing somebody else doing them. And in certain missions in GTA: SA, for example, the only choices presented to us are repeatedly violent acts (e.g. burying the foreman alive in concrete). I think that the issue of active participation is the issue that really worries me.

In summary:

Anyone with stubble on their chins should be able to play what they want and regularly denounce hot coffee-style mods and bully those that show an interest in them.

Anyone stubble-free (e.g. kids) should have their videogaming policed a little more carefully and the parents should show some interest. That way, if there's a clearer delineation between exactly what adults are playing and what little'uns are playing then it would quickly clear up the 'hot coffee'-style politician rants and allow us to enjoy gaming in peace.
Freek
15/07/05 @ 21:47
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think that in future you'll find that if a developer has a game feature that is questionable or can't passed the ratings board they'll juts delete it from the game entirely instead of jus turning it off but leaving in the code.
Problem solved.

It was the only reason why Rockstar could possibly get some flack, not for the mods but for that fact that it was created by them (unfinished faeture left in) and later activated by users. So the dev holds some responsablity, not much since they did deactivate it, but still.
Obviously not left in intentionally, just how games are made, something isn't entreily done, they just don't bother with it anymore but what work was done is still left in the built.

A little different then a mod that's been 100% user made.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 15/07/05 @ 22:51
fireclown
16/07/05 @ 12:19
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
[quote]Re: violence vs sex - which is mostest evilest: big can of worms here...really big worms, worms as big as snakes[/quote]

I'll go waaay out on a limb here and say that violence is more evil than sex, and that sex is not more evil than violence. This is why violence is illegal and sex is not.

It's really not a can of worms. Any adventurous twelve-year-old can get all the suggestive or explicit stuff they can eat. The Hot Coffee stuff, from the wmv I saw, looks like standard late-night channel-flipping. I can't really get steamed up over a pre-stubbly wanking over Hot Coffee rather than the terabytes of exposed flesh about three mouse-clicks away on hundreds of thousands of websites.

It's interactive...but what? It's going to encourage kids to think that a strong, consistent rhythm is necessary, or make them twitch their right hand spasmodically during sex? It would be very different if it was an interactive sequence showing women being hurt or degraded. As it is, it's like letting Texas Chainsaw into your house and then complaining when one of the characters says 'fuck'.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 16/07/05 @ 13:22
Krun
18/07/05 @ 00:43
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ban computers they're to blame for it all!!!!!
And while your at it ban thinking about stuff. My god the amount of dirty thoughts people have everyday is shocking. Electro shock therapy for all, its the only way you know.

~sarcasm
3william56
18/07/05 @ 07:41
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Whoops! Rockstar's telling porkies - it's not a mod after all. Unless someone's found a way to magically mod PS2 discs.

http://www.cnet.com.au/games/ps2/0,39029672,40055960,00.htm

Tut tut tut...

Comments: 1-30 of 30 in total

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery