Advertisement
Hot Coffee in PS2 GTA too News
PC
PlayStation 2
Xbox
News
by
Ellie Gibson
New evidence has emerged which suggests that the controversial 'Hot Coffee' mod was built into the GTA: San Andreas code and is not simply the work of hackers as Rockstar has claimed.
In a statement issued last week, the publisher said it had learned that "the modification is the work of a determined group of hackers who have gone to significant trouble to alter scenes in the official version of the game.
"In violation of the software user agreement, hackers created the Hot Coffee modification by disassembling and then combining, recompiling and altering the game's source code."
But then rumours began to emerge that Hot Coffee was not only unlockable in the PC version of San Andreas, but also the PS2 version - which cannot be hacked with additional content since it comes on DVD.
US website GameSpot decided to investigate, and entered the Hot Coffee codes into an Action Replay Max device hooked up to a PS2. Sure enough they were able to access the mini-game, in which lead character CJ has sex with his girlfriend.
It works like this: by moving the left analogue stick in a regular rhythm you can fill up an 'excitement meter'. Do it well and the girl will tell CJ he's "the man", do it badly and you'll be informed that "Failure to satisfy a woman is a CRIME!".
GameSpot describes the mini-game as being "about as raunchy as an episode of Sex and the City," since although there are three sexual positions to choose from you don't get to see it going in and out or anything.
But that hasn't stopped critics such as attorney Jack Thompson and Senator Hillary Clinton having a pop at Rockstar, as we reported last week. They're unlikely to take kindly to the news that Rockstar could be responsible for Hot Coffee despite the publisher's claims to the contrary... We'll keep you posted.
Advertisement
Are you excited about Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Thanks!
Related Games
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Latest Features
-
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Review [264]
-
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Preview [153]
-
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Preview [132]
-
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Preview [191]
-
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Preview [207]
Latest Videos
No videos found.
Latest News
-
Take-Two settles Hot Coffee class action [20]
-
GTA: San Andreas to be Xbox Original [31]
-
Thousands claim Hot Coffee compensation [51]
-
San Andreas is best-selling in US ever [17]
-
Mad convict files suit against Rockstar [41]
Latest Screenshots
10 June, 2005 [15]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
The Bodybuilder
18/07/05 @ 11:20
0
Good. I hope Rockstar get punished for this.
It's one thing to leave the code in thier (for obvious reasons that people well get thier hands on it), it's another to complately lie about it too. I hope the rockstar fatcats get HANGED for this, and they share thier GTA profit with africa. /sings "heal the world|" |
|
0
It was a stupid idea to lie about it in the first place
agreed. slightly embarasing if it's true, but i'm sure they're not minding all the extra press. [edit] although i don't see a problem in having left the code in, happens all the time, just that in this instance it was something that managed to get the mainstream's attention.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 12:24
|
|
tonynibbles
18/07/05 @ 11:23
0
What I dont understand is the relevance of this anyway. So what if this is an unlockable/hackable mini game?
The game is an 18 rated game. Baise-Moi is an 18 rated film and that film shows some horrific rape scenes. I knew if would be 'horrific' as the box says its a film with brutality and graphic scens of violence (the box also said the list of awards the film had won). Likewise, the box of GTA always descibes and shows clearly the nature of the game. Bah / not getting in to this again. They're all c*nts. Lying is a bad thing anyway.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 12:26
|
|
0
Got no problem with the code being in there at all what with me being a responsible adult and everything.
The problem is with Rockstar being accused of lying about it. Why did/would they? Publicity probably or maybe they thought it wouldn't be a big thing. ... and now the yanks are going mental, hope this blows over without the US inventing the mod police or some other knee-jerk reaction. makes me laugh to be honest. i'd give the mod a go myself if i hadn't killed my bios on friday. :( |
|
gamesb*tch
18/07/05 @ 11:41
0
It could have been worse, imagine if it had been an emulated version of Custer's Revenge
LOL |
|
0
There is a HUGE difference betwen unlockable game features (which are unlocked during normal play) and features which need to be hacked to get at.
So I dont see how this is a "complete lie". Someone has also released nude patches for tomb raider and doa volley ball which can also be "unlocked" by entering action replay codes, and those games werent even marked as adult.. Why is no-one upset by that? Answer - because its not part of the game, you have to change the code/graphics to do it! And what the problem is with fully clothed simulated sex in a game which has hit and runs, drive by murders, etc etc is beyond me anyhow. |
|
0
Even if the hot coffee sequence got compiled to PS2 doesn´t make rockstar responsible. They took it out. It´s not accessable with first party software. Even if they actually made the sequence it has to be accessed with help of none endorsed third party software. I think that is a big difference.
They are willing to get censored, but it would be devastating for the business if you not only have to censor your game, but you have to take out all the code that made the censored part possible and recompile the game again. And i think Rockstar acted responsible because they never told anyone about the sequence. Hot coffee wasn´t found on the ps2 before they "modders" found it in the pc-version. I can´t really understand that people are getting more upset for a minigame that rewards you if you pleases your girlfriend, when you from the first moment of the game can have sex with a prostitute and then kill her with a baseball bat (or why not shoot her back of the head off with a shotgun?) and take the money back. |
|
0
"Even if the hot coffee sequence got compiled to PS2 doesn´t make rockstar responsible. They took it out. It´s not accessable with first party software. Even if they actually made the sequence it has to be accessed with help of none endorsed third party software. I think that is a big difference."
I kind of agree with you, but I think you're missing the point. The point is that every company has to declare all the sex and violence that's in their game to the ESRB. It's not up to the ESRB to play every game for 200 hours looking for all the nasty stuff! And Rockstar never mentioned that they left a sex mini-game in all three versions of the game. I feel the ESRB will have to come down hard on them and give GTA:SA a retrospective AO rating, which, of course, is the equivalent of the rating it has in Britain anyway. |
|
kangarootoo
18/07/05 @ 13:02
0
*edit* Needless to say that comment was out of order, I've wiped it thre so I'm wiping it here. - Lutz.
Congratulation on being the first person to join the ignore list I honestly thougut I would never use.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 14:18
|
|
0
"It's not up to the ESRB to play every game for 200 hours looking for all the nasty stuff!"
Ah, but you can't get to this content by playing for 200 hours... I understand what you're saying though. tbh, I'm kinda suprised that more countries don't have a similar rating system to Britain. 15 and 18 seem like logical cut-off ages and there's no real ambiguity there. GTA should definitely be an 18 though, no doubt about it. It's just that in america the AO (adult only) rating means that a lot of shops wont stock it. The fools. |
|
0
Feanor
"And Rockstar never mentioned that they left a sex mini-game in all three versions of the game" They didn't leave them in the game though. They took them out. What part of that can't you get? You have to modify the game to activate them, which amounts to the same thing as adding the data for the scenes in as you can't simply experience the mini games out of the box. I really don't see what the problem is here. |
|
Ninjamagic
18/07/05 @ 13:51
0
Rockstar Lied simple as and its wrong. All of us knew it was in the game, its the once they have proven it was in the code that then tars
ALL other games companies with the same brush. By these plebs (Rockstar). Now Daily Mail will hate all of us (not that they like us anyway) but all our good work has been undone. Oh and by the way recompiling code "all that effort" etc.. to take it out as someone said. All you do is press 1 key. Make a cup of tea. Go in a meeting. (or substitute this for 1 hour lunch). Come back. Get the new build. Give it to QA who will test it. Make sure CJ doesnt grow a 3rd leg in game or anything else silly happens in the code to break the game (1 day job) and then bingo. Game Out. Its.not.that.big.an.effort. Now if its an Adult game thats fair do - but point is KIDS buy it and if some US Senator walks in the room with his 10 year old with a softcore computer porn game on. Really your asking for it arent you? Fine Rockstar - theyre not gods, will bring them down a peg or three and then the rest of us can re-biuld the already shattered confidence the public media has for us in games. We Out.... |
|
0
Are we now going to get upset about motorbikes being limited to a certain maximum speed as well? I mean, with just the right modification, they could reach speeds that are way illegal even when we're not considering the conventional speed limits...
Listen, everybody in the world: gamers don't play source code. They interact with the graphical presentation that's being made possible by commands in the code that are accessible. Everything that's not accessible without actually modifying the product itself, should not be part of the discussion. There is no difference between changing a certain flag in the code to get to something, or actually adding commands such that the game displays stuff that's inappropriate, apart from the fact that the first action might be slightly easier to perform. How come we're even discussing this? |
|
0
"Ah, but you can't get to this content by playing for 200 hours... I understand what you're saying though. tbh, I'm kinda suprised that more countries don't have a similar rating system to Britain. 15 and 18 seem like logical cut-off ages and there's no real ambiguity there. GTA should definitely be an 18 though, no doubt about it. It's just that in america the AO (adult only) rating means that a lot of shops wont stock it. The fools."
Yes, the American rating system is flawed in not using a Restricted-18 rating they way New Zealand and Britain do. Fable and GTA:SA should not get the same rating of M for Mature. American movie ratings are also screwy in the same way, though. "Everything that's not accessible without actually modifying the product itself, should not be part of the discussion. There is no difference between changing a certain flag in the code to get to something, or actually adding commands such that the game displays stuff that's inappropriate, apart from the fact that the first action might be slightly easier to perform. How come we're even discussing this?" Because Rockstar lied to the ESRB, and then lied to the press. Games simply cannot be rated properly if companies are not going to disclose what is on the discs they submit for ratings. According to your argument, a game company could put a hardcore porn scene on the disc of a kiddy platform game that could be accessed by downloading a tiny unofficial patch or by typing in an Action Replay code. And they wouldn't have done anything wrong.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 15:07
|
|
0
"If it's on the disc then they are required to inform the ESRB of that fact. What part of that don't you get?"
So it's on the disc, which means that the ESRB must be informed? Sorry, but that seems utterly unfounded to me. What if the game contacts a server and the server has certain textures making the game inappropriate, and somebody finds out how to use these textures on the server in the game? It's not on the disc. What if the server contains a config file with flags that can be changed to unlock these parts? It's not on the disc...maybe they could even put a full plugin server-side that's inaccessible to the normal user....that would be the same thing. There are always possibilities to alter a product, but this is no reason to put it on the box. Altering source code is altering source code, no matter if it's jsut a few flags or complete graphical commands. What if I install the game on a HD and change all the sound samples with the swearing voice of a rap artist? Edit: Nah, that would be a bad example for it's got nothing to do with the sourcecode.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 15:07
|
|
PearOfAnguish
18/07/05 @ 14:02
0
"you don't get to see it going in and out or anything."
What? I don't understand what this means. Someone explain. |
|
Ninjamagic
18/07/05 @ 14:02
0
ie> Point is there is a LIMIT.
Yes also when you submit you have to tell the ratings ALL unlockable cheat areas/codes/missions/walkthroughs as PART of the submission. In fact when you sign the form you "say" this, so if ever something happens its unlikely it will be the rating board with the fine but the publisher (Rockstar). |
|
0
Feanor
" "They didn't leave them in the game though. They took them out. What part of that can't you get?' If it's on the disc then they are required to inform the ESRB of that fact. What part of that don't you get?" Well, if you look here and here, you'll find the following: "To get a game certified with an ESRB rating, publishers fill out a detailed questionnaire explaining exactly what's in the game, and submit it to ESRB along with actual videotaped footage of the game, showing the most extreme content and an accurate representation of the context and product as a whole." "Every publisher of a game rated by the ESRB is legally bound to disclose all pertinent content when submitting the game for an ESRB rating." All pertinent content, being that which is accessible by the user out of the box. I don't think you'll find anywhere on there it says that everything on the disc, regardless of whether it is in the game or not, should be disclosed to the ESRB. |
|
mustardkid
18/07/05 @ 14:33
0
well if rockstar are responsible for hot coffee the the us government are responsible for this
|
|
0
"Every publisher of a game rated by the ESRB is legally bound to disclose all pertinent content when submitting the game for an ESRB rating."
The ESRB think it's pertinent enough to be worth investigating. You don't. I'll think I'll go with the ESRB on this one. According to your argument, Rockstar could have put an actual porn video on the PS2 GTA:SA disc and not have done anything wrong if you could only access it using an Action Replay. Somehow, I don't think that line of thinking is going to be accepted by the ESRB. www.gamespot.com/news/2005/07/08/news_6128759.html
Edited 3 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 16:45
|
|
0
"Rockstar could have put an actual porn video on the PS2 GTA:SA disc and not have done anything wrong if you could only access it using an Action Replay"
Uhh, if it's not playable out-of-the-box by any device, I wonder why this is wrong? If you allow modified sourcecode to fall under ESRB ratings, you could rate *anything* 18+. Allow me to explain: What if Rockstar only put "thrusting" animations in the game? Somebody could easily take those, put them in their mod by applying it to a model of the main character, put a girl in front of the character and voilà, a sex simulator has been constructed. The boundaries are just too vague.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 16:50
|
|
Ninjamagic
18/07/05 @ 15:49
0
Which has nothing to do with altering source code.
------------------------------------------------------------ - Its not altering source code its complementing it. Its obvious that whole action was made by scripts. Just this time you changed the script not the source code. |
|
Ninjamagic
18/07/05 @ 16:17
0
Look, lets just stop this right here.
We are both (and all) intelligent people on here. We could argue the pedantics for 100hours on here but the Bottom line is this: ---------------------------------------------------------- ROCKSTAR: Meeting. Hey we got a cool mode here its built into the tool editor for the scripting missions and it allows you to have sex in game with your GF. Would make 3million kids buy our game more when announced 3weeks after launch and up sales PROGRAMMERS: Well actually we could use the same code as the bicycle which means you have to press Up and Down to peddle. DESIGNERS: I can set the camera waypoints and build a room with a bed on. ARTISTS: I can make sure it “fits” in when theyre doing it and theres no collisions, polygons or corruptions. ROCKSTAR: Right is it in? Looks like it but you know what. If we release the game as it is we will be fined millions, banned from countries and be the object of Media Hate, but more importantly “We’ll get screwed”. ANON: Right I have took it out of the game code of the disk but it can be activated by a mod. Which ahem, will make us legally safe cos we can say it wasn’t us. They then lie and cheat at the same time basqueing in the extra sales and glory. At the expense of the rest of us who are made to look like liars and kid corrupters and “people not to be trusted”. Fine Rockstar for fibbing. Because in a court of law. If it went down to the nitty gritty. It could quite easily be proved that this mod was made. ( I mean hand over source code police impoundment etc…. and alteration and it would be classed as perjury etc..). Right that’s it! OK i cant prove it but as i said, were not stupid are we? Also Ive had enough =) We out... |
|
0
I don't see how anyone can even argue in defense of Rockstar. I love the company, I admittedly enjoy the GTA series, I agree that US laws are stupid and that the country gets into a frenzy over the dumbest stuff, but the point is that *Rockstar lied. They were asked if the minigame was in the game and they said no. They said it was not in the original code and therefore they could not be held responsible for any modding that was done.
As ambiguous as this could have been (and was) for the PC version, the fact that it can also be accessed on the ps2 version where even gamespot and eurogamer both have said no elements can be added since it's on DVD (and i wouldn't be surprised if it gets discovered on the xbox version as someone earlier pointed out) calls into question Rockstar's claim. At this point it's hardly about whether or not an M rating already allows pornographic material to be allowed in the game or whether it's hugely ironic that a person can legally watch porn at around the same age that they can legaly buy a game that, through implementing cheats, allows a much duller version re-enactment of that. What matters now is that, in many people's eyes, Rockstar lied about this. I love Rockstar, I hate politicians that have nothing better to do with their lives but attack games, but lying about what was on the disc was still a stupid move and I simply don't see how anyone, avid gamer or not, can't even question that.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 18/07/05 @ 18:40
|
|
0
"They were asked if the minigame was in the game and they said no."
Oh? If you're so certain of this, why don't you back it up with a quote. Only thing I can find is this: "As to whether a whole mini-game involving humping your girlfriends to gain extra points was created by Rockstar, Rodders wouldn't comment, other than to state that the mod was created by modders." -Inquirer I have read the response as well, and I can't find the "lie" either. The media these days are quick to twist words, such that it sounds Rockstar claimed they haven't made the content themselves. But they didn't claim that. |
|
0
"I have read the response as well, and I can't find the "lie" either. The media these days are quick to twist words, such that it sounds Rockstar claimed they haven't made the content themselves. But they didn't claim that."
From your same source: "The hot coffee scenes **cannot be created without intentional and significant technical modifications and reverse engineering of the game's source code.**" - Rockstar Why massive sites like Gamespot and Eurogamer are saying that this puts Rockstar on the hot plate is because of statements like that. The fact that, from the horse's mouth, they cannot be created without intentional and significant modifications and engineering of the source code means that they are not responsible for the game. Note that they used "created" in that quote. Not "accessed", not "played", but "created" which ultimately, to many people, states that they did not create this. If you're right and Rockstar did create the game then they better come out with a definitive statement in the next couple of days that states this because regardless of how many games of semantics you want to play, that quote alone is what's causing them to shoot themselves in the foot regardless of their quote you posted earlier. |
|
captain-future
18/07/05 @ 18:41
0
only problem I see is that Rockstar has a little explaining to do, because the let people think it was an illegal mod of the pc-version.
caught with the hand in the cookie jar. on the other hand the game is rated 18+, so I don't see a problem. |
|
0
"only problem I see is that Rockstar has a little explaining to do, because the let people think it was an illegal mod of the pc-version. "
*Exactly*. The way things have been said up to this point, although obviously very carefully, only leads most people to think that their stance is that they didn't create the game. That, instead it was created by people who tampered with the source code. If it wasn't a mod, then they need to suck it up and tell the media clearly "We created the minigame but then decided to deactivate it because we knew it wouldn't fly." At least that way, the politicians could still be mad at them and although they would have still violated the ESRB agreement they wouldn't have done an even worse thing than that by lying about it. |
|
0
' "They were asked if the minigame was in the game and they said no."
Oh? If you're so certain of this, why don't you back it up with a quote.' From the link I provided in my previous post: "This afternoon, when asked if the "Hot Coffee" code was included in game discs manufactured by Rockstar or its agents, the company commented more fully than it had previously. Specifically, a spokesperson for Rockstar told GameSpot News it was not." Seems like a lie to me. :) |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
