Hillary renews attacks on video game violence

E-Z-B

E-Z-B

CAGiversary!
This coming from someone who's so damn pro-war. I'm getting so sick of listening to her and Lieberman. Isn't there other party who wants to take them?

Backed by gruesome shots of computerised cannibalism, police beatings and violence, campaigners warned parents that their children were increasingly at risk from "sadistic" video games.

Senator Hillary Clinton and former vice presidential nominee Joseph Lieberman meanwhile launched new legislation intended to protect kids from graphic, violent and sexual material on their game consoles.

The National Institute on Media and the Family said in its annual report that video game retailors had failed to honor promises to safeguard children from violent and sexual content in new generation video games.

"There has been significant industry progress and reforms over the last decade, but ever more violent and sadistic games are still ending up in the hands of children," said the institute's president David Walsh.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/29/051129223726.dqn74ka0.html

Hey Hillary - how about helping to stop the violence in Iraq first? Dumbass.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']God forbid anyone concentrate on more than one thing at a time!!!! It's obvious that if one doesn't spend all their time in a single-minded, one-track, steadfast approach, they're a dumbass!!![/QUOTE]

This is just like Arlen Specter jumping on the T.O. / Eagles controversy, politicians getting involved with Baseball, etc.. Hillary should be worrying about the Iraqi disaster, Alito nomination, ballooning deficit, stalling economy, and so on. Not video games. This is something I'd expect from the bible-thumping right.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']Hillary should be worrying about the Iraqi disaster, Alito nomination, ballooning deficit, stalling economy, and so on. Not video games. This is something I'd expect from the bible-thumping right.[/QUOTE]

She already does.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']This coming from someone who's so damn pro-war. I'm getting so sick of listening to her and Lieberman. Isn't there other party who wants to take them?
[/QUOTE]

:applause:
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I don't care. Hillary is attacking conservatives on their own territory and winning. That's all that counts.[/QUOTE]

The ends don't justify the means. A crazy worthless cunt is a crazy worthless cunt no matter how you look at it. No positive spin to be found here. No party in their right mind should want or support her. To do so is asinine.
 
[quote name='Nogib']The ends don't justify the means. A crazy worthless cunt is a crazy worthless cunt no matter how you look at it. No positive spin to be found here. No party in their right mind should want or support her. To do so is asinine.[/QUOTE]

Wow, limbaugh would be proud.

Actually polls show that just over 50% of the population would be willing to vote for her, and the clinton years aren't exactly viewed as horrible times by the general public. Not quite the political kryptonite that you seem to think she is.

So what, if it passes then that means kids will have a harder time accessing games with graphic sex and violence. Kind of like how they can't legally go into an r-rated film without an adult, or legally buy or legally watch porno. Wow, you're right, what kind of world would that be where kids can't buy M rated games without parents? No end result is worth that horror!

People often overreact to legislation focused on their hobby. There are NRA members who (obviously not aggreeing with official NRA policy) oppose background checks, banning convicted felons from obtaining guns etc. Everything spells doom to them. The same reaction often results from some gamers whenever anything regarding video games, be it ensuring ratings are accurate or blocking kids from purchasing (without an adult) graphic video games.

Even good parents aren't everywhere. If you have a kid 12, 13, 14 etc. they aren't supposed to be with their parents all day. They can walk to friends houses, ride bikes etc. Unless you think anyone under the age of 18 should be kept under complete parental supervision, then there's nothing stopping them from detouring into a store that sells video games if there's one nearby.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Actually polls show that just over 50% of the population would be willing to vote for her, and the clinton years aren't exactly viewed as horrible times by the general public. Not quite the political kryptonite that you seem to think she is.[/QUOTE]

Which just serves to prove how utterly retarded the general populus is. No, the Clinton years were not bad at all, but just because they are husband and wife does not make them the same person. If people are simply liking her by association of what Bill's terms were like, we are royally fucked. People need to make a bit more of an educated decision other than "well, we liked him, so why not her too?"

[quote name='alonzomourning23']So what, if it passes then that means kids will have a harder time accessing games with graphic sex and violence. Kind of like how they can't legally go into an r-rated film without an adult, or legally buy or legally watch porno. Wow, you're right, what kind of world would that be where kids can't buy M rated games without parents? No end result is worth that horror![/QUOTE]

Movies are far more graphic than video games and I don't see anyone forcing IDs for buying a DVD. The movie industry is kind of hypocritical in this sense where they make movie theaters ID people yet a kid can run into any store and buy the DVD without a second thought and watch it over and over to death.

Until people stop bandwagoning against video games and make it a level playing field for all forms of entertainment, I flat out will not support any potential legislation of gaming in any way. Like it or not, it is the parent's responsibility anyways, not the government's. Damn right I take offense by asshats singling out my hobby just because it's a popular thing to do. There are bigger fish to fry than worrying about doing parent's jobs for them. Then again, I still maintain that many people shouldn't be allowed to breed without taking a test. If that was true, this would be a non-issue since bad parents simply wouldn't exist.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']Falsifying quotes is considered academic dishonesty.[/QUOTE]I'm still perplexed. What quotes were falsified?
 
[quote name='Nogib']Which just serves to prove how utterly retarded the general populus is. No, the Clinton years were not bad at all, but just because they are husband and wife does not make them the same person. If people are simply liking her by association of what Bill's terms were like, we are royally fucked. People need to make a bit more of an educated decision other than "well, we liked him, so why not her too?"[/quote]

Uhhh........ no. You think she's a nutcase and think most people agree, which isn't the case outside of solid conservatives.



Movies are far more graphic than video games
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, movies don't have you take the role of the guy doing the killing. Though I'd argue that the "far more graphic" argument is wrong, either way all you do is back up this bills supporters. Video game groups not taking the issue seriously reinforces the idea that the industry is not capable of regulating itself.

and I don't see anyone forcing IDs for buying a DVD. The movie industry is kind of hypocritical in this sense where they make movie theaters ID people yet a kid can run into any store and buy the DVD without a second thought and watch it over and over to death.
Click to expand...

Not true, many stores ask for ID. But, they are seen to succesfully self regulate themselves. Video games rating system seems are regarded as insufficient, and that they are very lenient in their ratings. There's also the issue of the games having such wide appeal among youth and often appear marketed to the underage population.

Until people stop bandwagoning against video games and make it a level playing field for all forms of entertainment, I flat out will not support any potential legislation of gaming in any way. Like it or not, it is the parent's responsibility anyways, not the government's. Damn right I take offense by asshats singling out my hobby just because it's a popular thing to do. There are bigger fish to fry than worrying about doing parent's jobs for them.
Click to expand...

So you are going to dismiss the issue out of spite? Well, we all know were not taking this stuff seriously has got the video game industry.


Then again, I still maintain that many people shouldn't be allowed to breed without taking a test. If that was true, this would be a non-issue since bad parents simply wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...

No, kids getting adult material will be a non issue when parents chain themselves to their kids. Saying the parents have total control over everything is just a convenient excuse. Its funny how few people would claim their parents exercised such absolute control over them, but supposedly all good parents do.

make it a level playing field for all forms of entertainment
Click to expand...

But the rating organiztion is not as good as the one for movies.
 
I'm curious about why Alonzo feels the rating system for games is so poor? To be honest, I find it to be better for games especially in the display and explanation placed on the actual boxes at retail.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']I'm curious about why Alonzo feels the rating system for games is so poor? To be honest, I find it to be better for games especially in the display and explanation placed on the actual boxes at retail.[/QUOTE]

Well, I think that they often rate games M when they probably should be rated AO. I think the industry itself has an issue with how to market these games though. Most of the M games are advertised in ways that appeal to people under 17. I'm not going to argue whether its intentional or not (though I personally feel games like GTA are). This is partly due to just the nature of the video game industry, but quite often they seem not to care one way or the other. While definately not perfect, I don't think the rating system is poor per se, though I think they should try to adopt the movie ratings (if possible) since people do not seem to take video game ratings as seriously.

But the video game industry always lags behind. First it was mortal kombat, then night trap, and now the big one being san andreas. They only seem to pay attention when legislation is being threatened. The mpaa seems very willing to clamp down on movies and the movie companies have to work with them. The esrb appears less willing to put their foot down.

They do a horrible job at keeping a good public image, and my argument has always been how they are percieved. The industry itself, by blowing off the argument than anything needs to be done, present an image that they don't care which appears partially true. The esrb, as I said, seems to stumble whenever a problem arises, and they seem nervous about exercising their authority. In issues like this it all comes down to perception, and it just seems like the industry is making every possible mistake, a perfect example is how they behaved with the san andreas issue before finally changing the rating.

I really don't care what happens here. I just want hillary clinton to become president and I find this to be a good political move on her part. Whichever works best for her is the outcome I want.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Well, I think that they often rate games M when they probably should be rated AO. I think the industry itself has an issue with how to market these games though. Most of the M games are advertised in ways that appeal to people under 17. I'm not going to argue whether its intentional or not (though I personally feel games like GTA are). This is partly due to just the nature of the video game industry, but quite often they seem not to care one way or the other. While definately not perfect, I don't think the rating system is poor per se, though I think they should try to adopt the movie ratings (if possible) since people do not seem to take video game ratings as seriously. [/quote]

I think either you're misinformed or just wearing blinders because of your like for Clinton. The content in basically all M rated is no worse than hte majority of R rated movies. Even though I don't totally buy the argument that games like GTa are even marketed towards kids, I especially don't buy that they are anymore marketed to them than R-rated movies. It's also not the fault of a system if people don't take it seriously. I highly doubt anyone took movie ratings seriously the first decade it was around, hell most people don't take them seriously still. Working at a theatre I so plenty of parents take their 12 year old kid to see an R-rated movie.

[quote name='alonzomourning23']
But the video game industry always lags behind. First it was mortal kombat, then night trap, and now the big one being san andreas. They only seem to pay attention when legislation is being threatened. The mpaa seems very willing to clamp down on movies and the movie companies have to work with them. The esrb appears less willing to put their foot down. [/quote]

I don't mean to offend you but this is just you not knowing much about that which you speak. A movie ratings system hasn't just been a constant since some guy picked up a camera. Before the system we used today was created there was something called the Hays Production Code. Botomline was it was not something that had to be publicily disclosed (it was simply approved or disapporved, disapproval carried no real penelty) and if a film didn't follow it companies would just release a movie under a subsidary production company to get the film out anyways. Self regulation in the 20's held up decently under it, but when it got to the 60's movie companies didn't care. And like video games there were certain movies that basically sparked the idea for a new ratings system.

That history lesson aside now, I'll go on to tell you that Mortal Kombat/Night trap were around before the system stated for games. Also the movie companies don't have to work with the MPAA at all (and when they do they hate it), the ratings system for both games and movies is totally voluntary. The thing that keeps movie companies in the ratings system is that many theaters that are members of NATO will not carry an unrated movie. As you can plainly see an unrated can be released at retail with no problems whatsoever.

[quote name='alonzomourning23']
They do a horrible job at keeping a good public image, and my argument has always been how they are percieved. The industry itself, by blowing off the argument than anything needs to be done, present an image that they don't care which appears partially true. The esrb, as I said, seems to stumble whenever a problem arises, and they seem nervous about exercising their authority. In issues like this it all comes down to perception, and it just seems like the industry is making every possible mistake, a perfect example is how they behaved with the san andreas issue before finally changing the rating.

I really don't care what happens here. I just want hillary clinton to become president and I find this to be a good political move on her part. Whichever works best for her is the outcome I want.[/QUOTE]

Horrible image? They do a hell of a lot to boaster awareness about ratings and their image than the MPAA (or any other ratings system) has done in a couple decades. PSAs, commericals, websites with tons of info, in sotre signs and ads, etc. Also, I don't know if they blow off the argument, I can certainly bet they are sick of being attacked time and time again by politicians seeking politicial leverage who don't really care and couldn't name 10 games that their aids and anti-video games lobbiers didn't tell them "were too violent". I aksed you about the ratings not the industry, I don't really see them stumble when someone tries to pass an unconsitutional statute against them they take them to court ASAP. The whole san Anderas ordeal is not a good reference point for you either. Like these policitians, you fail to realize that there's no way the ESRB could've known about the whole "hot coffee" thing. They can't decode and hack games. If you want to stay with the movie comparison it's alot like slipping in little things after the censors have looked at the film or intentionally hiding them. You think they make every possible mistake, but all you've given me so far is your opinion that what they have done is a mistake. I'm not saying the industry is mistake-free not by a long shot, but the ratings sytem (which you somehow turned into "the industry" when asked about) is certaibnly not a mistake.

And frankly, if you are just going to were blinders about a situation because for some reason you like the policitian, that's you prerogative but don't expect someone to really respect your opinion on the situation then.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']

I don't mean to offend you but this is just you not knowing much about that which you speak. A movie ratings system hasn't just been a constant since some guy picked up a camera. Before the system we used today was created there was something called the Hays Production Code. Botomline was it was not something that had to be publicily disclosed (it was simply approved or disapporved, disapproval carried no real penelty) and if a film didn't follow it companies would just release a movie under a subsidary production company to get the film out anyways. Self regulation in the 20's held up decently under it, but when it got to the 60's movie companies didn't care. And like video games there were certain movies that basically sparked the idea for a new ratings system.

That history lesson aside now, I'll go on to tell you that Mortal Kombat/Night trap were around before the system stated for games. Also the movie companies don't have to work with the MPAA at all (and when they do they hate it), the ratings system for both games and movies is totally voluntary. The thing that keeps movie companies in the ratings system is that many theaters that are members of NATO will not carry an unrated movie. As you can plainly see an unrated can be released at retail with no problems whatsoever. [/quote]

I know that, though video game do not need to be rated either. But, for mainstream distribution purposes it is highly desirable to be rated, much like it is for movies. Movies have different ratings in different countries though, so being submitted for a u.s. rating does not transfer to other countries (as you seem to suggest with the NATO thing).


Horrible image? They do a hell of a lot to boaster awareness about ratings and their image than the MPAA (or any other ratings system) has done in a couple decades. PSAs, commericals, websites with tons of info, in sotre signs and ads, etc. Also, I don't know if they blow off the argument, I can certainly bet they are sick of being attacked time and time again by politicians seeking politicial leverage who don't really care and couldn't name 10 games that their aids and anti-video games lobbiers didn't tell them "were too violent". I aksed you about the ratings not the industry, I don't really see them stumble when someone tries to pass an unconsitutional statute against them they take them to court ASAP. The whole san Anderas ordeal is not a good reference point for you either. Like these policitians, you fail to realize that there's no way the ESRB could've known about the whole "hot coffee" thing. They can't decode and hack games. If you want to stay with the movie comparison it's alot like slipping in little things after the censors have looked at the film or intentionally hiding them. You think they make every possible mistake, but all you've given me so far is your opinion that what they have done is a mistake. I'm not saying the industry is mistake-free not by a long shot, but the ratings sytem (which you somehow turned into "the industry" when asked about) is certaibnly not a mistake.
Click to expand...

Well, you really didn't argue anything about their public image. You said why you don't think the perception is correct, when the whole point was their public perception.

But what happened though? They changed the rating, and rockstar decided, since they did not want an AO games that many retailers wouldn't sell, to re-release it as MA.

And frankly, if you are just going to were blinders about a situation because for some reason you like the policitian, that's you prerogative but don't expect someone to really respect your opinion on the situation then.
Click to expand...

My point with that is I don't think the issue is important one way or the other. I don't think either side is ridiculous (extremes on both sides excluded). The only benefit or harm I see is political. So the only way I see any benefit is if it aids a politician I support.
 
Here's the thing Alonzo. MAKING San Andreas have an AO rating would be like a death knell for that game, at least in comparison to previous profits. Consider what happened with "Showgirls", granted that happened in theaters but there's a stigma, at least with movies, when it gets an Adult rating.
If GTA gets sold to any kid, "Hot Coffee" mod or not, it's the RETAILERS fault not Rockstars. There are stores that WILL card on Mature rated games. Personally I wish they'd fix the TV ratings system. Tell me WHY a TV14 rated movie from the theater shouldn't have the same content as when it was in theaters if it's PG-13. If things are cut out they shouldn't be. I swear TV ratings are so much stricter and retarded for that matter.
edit: I know Hillary is playing frothing mouth to get some people on the Right for votes but it's still annoying to see her playing Tipper Gore. GOD I hate Tipper Gore.
 
In that since NATO = National Association of Theater Owners, not North Atlantic Treaty Organization, sorry about the confusion.
Click to expand...

Ya, I thought that was strange. ;)

[quote name='Sarang01']Here's the thing Alonzo. MAKING San Andreas have an AO rating would be like a death knell for that game, at least in comparison to previous profits. Consider what happened with "Showgirls", granted that happened in theaters but there's a stigma, at least with movies, when it gets an Adult rating.
If GTA gets sold to any kid, "Hot Coffee" mod or not, it's the RETAILERS fault not Rockstars. There are stores that WILL card on Mature rated games. Personally I wish they'd fix the TV ratings system. Tell me WHY a TV14 rated movie from the theater shouldn't have the same content as when it was in theaters if it's PG-13. If things are cut out they shouldn't be. I swear TV ratings are so much stricter and retarded for that matter.
edit: I know Hillary is playing frothing mouth to get some people on the Right for votes but it's still annoying to see her playing Tipper Gore. GOD I hate Tipper Gore.[/QUOTE]

I don't understand why the esrb should care whether san andreas, or any game, sells. If its the death knell of the game then so be it, it should be none of their concern. The company can change the content (as they have done) if they don't want their game rated AO.

But the hot coffee mod is rockstars fault. Honestly, they should know what is on the games they sell. Whether they knew it was there or they only accidentally left it on matters only in degrees, they still should have known it was on the disc.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']But the hot coffee mod is rockstars fault. Honestly, they should know what is on the games they sell. Whether they knew it was there or they only accidentally left it on matters only in degrees, they still should have known it was on the disc.[/QUOTE]

No offense, but you're obviously not a computer programmer. Taking out a feature like that at the last minute is like knocking down one of the walls of a house without properly assessing whether the house will stand without it. Berating a company over content that only the most tech-savvy machina-pron aficionados will ever bother to unlock is an undertaking so imbicilic that I would normally only expect it of Republicans and christians.
 
[quote name='camoor']No offense, but you're obviously not a computer programmer. Taking out a feature like that at the last minute is like knocking down one of the walls of a house without properly assessing whether the house will stand without it. Berating a company over content that only the most tech-savvy machina-pron aficionados will ever bother to unlock is an undertaking so imbicilic that I would normally only expect it of Republicans and christians.[/QUOTE]

That's their responsibility. If they leave content in a game that could alter the games rating then its their responsibility to report that. Difficulty is not an excuse. Either take the higher rating or find a way to remove it.

And besides, if its so imbicillic why did they rerelease it without the scene?
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']That's their responsibility. If they leave content in a game that could alter the games rating then its their responsibility to report that. Difficulty is not an excuse. Either take the higher rating or find a way to remove it.

And besides, if its so imbicillic why did they rerelease it without the scene?[/QUOTE]

Because congress is full of imbeciles. :p
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']That's their responsibility. If they leave content in a game that could alter the games rating then its their responsibility to report that. Difficulty is not an excuse. Either take the higher rating or find a way to remove it.

And besides, if its so imbicillic why did they rerelease it without the scene?[/QUOTE]

Bottom line give them a break. It's one thing for them to have a CODE in game you can use to unlock it it's another to use a Gameshark to unlock a mini-game that they could've BURIED in it and not expected a cheat device to do the trick. My point is Rockstar made no effort to exploit the glitch for monetary gain, they wanted it BURIED. Shit man you know how persistent Gamesharker fuckers are, they're the same scumbags that ruined PSO Version 1 for people and don't give me that memory card shit as I'm sure the assholes STILL would've found someway to cheat.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Bottom line give them a break. It's one thing for them to have a CODE in game you can use to unlock it it's another to use a Gameshark to unlock a mini-game that they could've BURIED in it and not expected a cheat device to do the trick. My point is Rockstar made no effort to exploit the glitch for monetary gain, they wanted it BURIED. Shit man you know how persistent Gamesharker fuckers are, they're the same scumbags that ruined PSO Version 1 for people and don't give me that memory card shit as I'm sure the assholes STILL would've found someway to cheat.[/QUOTE]

See, the video game industry needs to be viewed as tough on ratings, "it's hard, give them a break" is the type of logic that will only reinforce legislation like this and the idea that the video game industry cannot regulate itself.

Though, while I don't really care much overall, I do find this particular argument a little ridiculous, and its the only aspect where I really favor one side for non political reasons. It's in the game, it should therefore be rated. This isn't a hack, its unlocking part of the game. The company should be responsible for whatever they put on the disc, the rating system shouldn't be subservient to them, and the rating system should not concern itself with how they are affected. Just because it was buried deep in the game doesn't change the fact that its still in the game. If they knowingly left it in there then that is a risk they took, they should not be given any break if they knowingly left it in there.
 
I have to agree with Alonzo on this matter. There have been plenty of times when developers have integrated things into a game and later cut them out. I'm sure they didn't just spackle and paint (for lack of a better metaphor) over the code, but actually cut it out. To have a bunch of stuff like that in the game is either A) Lazy programming or B) keeping stuff like that in a game so that it can be found.

Anyways, I think we can assume that the hot coffee situation can be like a call to a function. If they just delete the function call, there's no reason to keep the function in the game. I'm sure we don't see the sex engine anywhere else in the game, so I don't see how removing the whole sex game from the game would have been such a hassle.

Anyways, there are a few things to note. It's not the gamesharkers who are at fault. The first hot coffee mod was in fact a "mod" for the PC version. It was only after the modder stated that the content was all in the game that the people who use gameshark decided to fiddle with their PS2 versions. Also, Rock* is also quite obnoxious with their strident claims that this was all hack tomfoolery, despite the mod being extremely small and only modifiying a single bit in the game.
 
I can't see why anyone is defending Rockstar in this matter if you know all the facts. They are the ones who left this content in the game, hid the content from the ESRB to avoid the AO rating, and then lied about it not being in the game after it came to light. I don't care if it was difficult or whatever to take out; they are responsible for what they publish, period. Like Alonzo said, either take out the offending content or risk the AO rating.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']I have to agree with Alonzo on this matter. There have been plenty of times when developers have integrated things into a game and later cut them out. I'm sure they didn't just spackle and paint (for lack of a better metaphor) over the code, but actually cut it out. To have a bunch of stuff like that in the game is either A) Lazy programming or B) keeping stuff like that in a game so that it can be found.[/quote]
There are plenty of game where unfinished levels and other content are left on the disk since deleting them could hurt other parts of the game. The easiest thing to do is to comment it out do that it doesn't appear in the game as far as what gamers can see. Calling the programmers lazy isn't really true as their job is to get the game mechanics working right. To have to compromise that by having to get rid of unfinished content at the end of development is not something they like.
[quote name='capitalist_mao']Anyways, I think we can assume that the hot coffee situation can be like a call to a function. If they just delete the function call, there's no reason to keep the function in the game. I'm sure we don't see the sex engine anywhere else in the game, so I don't see how removing the whole sex game from the game would have been such a hassle.[/QUOTE]
Sure because you know exactly how it came about in the development process, right? You assume that nothing that was apart of the hot coffee hidden content was used anywhere else? You don't know since you weren't there when it was worked on If anything from it was used in other parts of the game, it's not as simple as hitting the delete key. The engine seems very similar to some of the minigames such as the dancing minigame or the gym minigames. You can't assume what you don't know.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Sure because you know exactly how it came about in the development process, right? You assume that nothing that was apart of the hot coffee hidden content was used anywhere else? You don't know since you weren't there when it was worked on If anything from it was used in other parts of the game, it's not as simple as hitting the delete key. The engine seems very similar to some of the minigames such as the dancing minigame or the gym minigames. You can't assume what you don't know.[/QUOTE]

I do, however, know that if there is an engine, they're not going to call the sex mini game to get to the engine. If the sex minigame is in fact similar to other minigames in the game, chances are, they're all borrowing from a single header file that defines the characteristics of the minigames. In which case, cutting out the minigame would not be at all detrimental.

Anyways, Rock* already re-released GTA SA without the sex minigame in it. I doubt that it changed the play mechanics much, if at all in the rest of the game. So, I think I can make this assumption since they've actually already cut out the sex minigame without harming the game. Yes, I think I have the right to call them lazy programmers. However, I also wouldn't hesitate to think that this was intentional. As much press and publicity as GTA SA garnered before the whole fiasco, I'd say that the controversey certainly ballooned the publicity well into the stratosphere where even people like my mom (who knows nothing about video games) know about GTA SA.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I can't see why anyone is defending Rockstar in this matter if you know all the facts. They are the ones who left this content in the game, hid the content from the ESRB to avoid the AO rating, and then lied about it not being in the game after it came to light. I don't care if it was difficult or whatever to take out; they are responsible for what they publish, period. Like Alonzo said, either take out the offending content or risk the AO rating.[/QUOTE]
I can't see why people assume they had some hidden agenda to corrupt the youth by shoving this pornographic minigame right in their faces and showing them things they'd never see otherwise. The ESRB did what it was supposed to do, evaluate the content that's in the game, that can be played under normal circumstances. Using a cheat device to undo code that the original game had tucked away isn't so highly looked upon by the EULA, but I guess that's nothing more than toilet paper in the manual. Neither side has nearly enough facts about the creation of this game to assume what went on was a conspiracy.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']I can't see why people assume they had some hidden agenda to corrupt the youth by shoving this pornographic minigame right in their faces and showing them things they'd never see otherwise. The ESRB did what it was supposed to do, evaluate the content that's in the game, that can be played under normal circumstances. Using a cheat device to undo code that the original game had tucked away isn't so highly looked upon by the EULA, but I guess that's nothing more than toilet paper in the manual. Neither side has nearly enough facts about the creation of this game to assume what went on was a conspiracy.[/QUOTE]

Considering how well Gamesharks and Action Replays sell, I'm going to assume that we can file that under normal circumstances. In fact, I think we can say that using a memory card with many games will significantly alter the playing experience, and memory cards cost just as much (if not more) than a gameshark or Action Replay.

As for Rock* as a company, I can hardly sympathize. The points El Principe pointed out are valid.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']I do, however, know that if there is an engine, they're not going to call the sex mini game to get to the engine. If the sex minigame is in fact similar to other minigames in the game, chances are, they're all borrowing from a single header file that defines the characteristics of the minigames. In which case, cutting out the minigame would not be at all detrimental.

Anyways, Rock* already re-released GTA SA without the sex minigame in it. I doubt that it changed the play mechanics much, if at all in the rest of the game. So, I think I can make this assumption since they've actually already cut out the sex minigame without harming the game. Yes, I think I have the right to call them lazy programmers. However, I also wouldn't hesitate to think that this was intentional. As much press and publicity as GTA SA garnered before the whole fiasco, I'd say that the controversey certainly ballooned the publicity well into the stratosphere where even people like my mom (who knows nothing about video games) know about GTA SA.[/QUOTE]
Just because they were able to take it out without screwing the game it doesn't mean that it didn't have any impact on other parts of the game. Coding doesn't doesn't exactly work as cleanly as you're suggesting, so I doubt it was an easy process to just cut it out of the game. If the always unimformed mom knows of the game and that it's not for kids, good for them. At least some good came out of this mess. It should make them question the games their kids want to make sure they're appropriate for them. If not, there's plenty of tools available for them to get involved and get informed.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Just because they were able to take it out without screwing the game it doesn't mean that it didn't have any impact on other parts of the game. Coding doesn't doesn't exactly work as cleanly as you're suggesting, so I doubt it was an easy process to just cut it out of the game. If the always unimformed mom knows of the game and that it's not for kids, good for them. At least some good came out of this mess. It should make them question the games their kids want to make sure they're appropriate for them. If not, there's plenty of tools available for them to get involved and get informed.[/QUOTE]

If the coding is not that clean, then, they're pretty sloppy coders. It's as simple as that. Efficient coding is typically quite clean and easily editable.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']Considering how well Gamesharks and Action Replays sell, I'm going to assume that we can file that under normal circumstances. In fact, I think we can say that using a memory card with many games will significantly alter the playing experience, and memory cards cost just as much (if not more) than a gameshark or Action Replay.

As for Rock* as a company, I can hardly sympathize. The points El Principe pointed out are valid.[/QUOTE]
Your argument that Gamesharks and ARs are just as much a part of the normal circustances as memory cards is that they are about the same in cost? Since codes for these devices aren't usually released until after the game is out, how can they be part of the gameplay experience. Though some individuals use them to hack, cheat, etc to affect others online where many developers work to prevent the users that use these devices to control their experience, does that mean these devices are part of the "normal circumstances" that developers created? Not to me it doesn't. There's generally plenty of codes that developers themselves put into games that were either part of the development process (god mode and others) that would count under normal circumstances, but normal circumstances relates to things that can be done in the game with no outside influences. Memory cards aren't in the same class since they're vital tools for gamers to play and continue to enjoy their games from where they left off in their previous session.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']If the coding is not that clean, then, they're pretty sloppy coders. It's as simple as that. Efficient coding is typically quite clean and easily editable.[/QUOTE]
:lol: Code doesn't always obey the coder and it doesn't always work in a logical manner. I've seen first hand experience where coding in an engine doesn't work out the way I or the team has wanted. When we wanted to change a value to shorten the time for an action to happen, if we changed it, nothing happened, and if we left it alone, it worked fine. One of my teachers had a project that he was working on with some coding problems. A redundant code that appeared three times couldn't be removed in any of the spots or the action wouldn't happen. And when you're on a schedule, sometimes you have to just worry about it working rather than having the code be efficient and spotless.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Your argument that Gamesharks and ARs are just as much a part of the normal circustances as memory cards is that they are about the same in cost? Since codes for these devices aren't usually released until after the game is out, how can they be part of the gameplay experience. Though some individuals use them to hack, cheat, etc to affect others online where many developers work to prevent the users that use these devices to control their experience, does that mean these devices are part of the "normal circumstances" that developers created? Not to me it doesn't. There's generally plenty of codes that developers themselves put into games that were either part of the development process (god mode and others) that would count under normal circumstances, but normal circumstances relates to things that can be done in the game with no outside influences. Memory cards aren't in the same class since they're vital tools for gamers to play and continue to enjoy their games from where they left off in their previous session.[/QUOTE]

Actually, online play is not part of the normal circumstances, which is why there is always a warning stating that "game experience may change during online play". Even says that right here on my HL2 box.
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']Actually, online play is not part of the normal circumstances, which is why there is always a warning stating that "game experience may change during online play". Even says that right here on my HL2 box.[/QUOTE]
Not hardly. It's also on MMO's like FFXI where online is a part of the normal circumstances, so it's only a disclaimer that's put on any title with online gameplay.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Not hardly. It's also on MMO's like FFXI where online is a part of the normal circumstances, so it's only a disclaimer that's put on any title with online gameplay.[/QUOTE]

Essentially, Online gameplay can't be considered normal circumstances. Unless you want to redefine normal circumstances.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']:lol: Code doesn't always obey the coder and it doesn't always work in a logical manner. I've seen first hand experience where coding in an engine doesn't work out the way I or the team has wanted. When we wanted to change a value to shorten the time for an action to happen, if we changed it, nothing happened, and if we left it alone, it worked fine. One of my teachers had a project that he was working on with some coding problems. A redundant code that appeared three times couldn't be removed in any of the spots or the action wouldn't happen. And when you're on a schedule, sometimes you have to just worry about it working rather than having the code be efficient and spotless.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. Rockstar is famous for creating game worlds, virtual sandboxes, and then jamming them all onto one (or in this case two) discs. In very short timeframes.

capitalist_mao, it's good that you have responsible teachers that are teaching you the fundamentals of computer programming, and the ideal way in which a computer program should be created. However in the real world, working with a team of people who have the pressures of tight deadlines, game disc footprints and high customer expectations, it can be very risky to completely cut out a piece of code from the game at the last minute - I know that without enough time to test the impact of a cut I will not release code, however it seems like Rockstar didn't have that option here and made their best effort to censor the content in the time given.

This isn't drug companies releasing shallowly tested heart-attack causing pharmaceuticals, this isn't even software glitches crashing with life-imperiling results. This is a dopey sex minigame that shouldn't be a big deal to anyone who's old enough to be able to unlock it (unless that person is a "god warrior").
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']I can't see why people assume they had some hidden agenda to corrupt the youth by shoving this pornographic minigame right in their faces and showing them things they'd never see otherwise. The ESRB did what it was supposed to do, evaluate the content that's in the game, that can be played under normal circumstances. Using a cheat device to undo code that the original game had tucked away isn't so highly looked upon by the EULA, but I guess that's nothing more than toilet paper in the manual. Neither side has nearly enough facts about the creation of this game to assume what went on was a conspiracy.[/QUOTE]

I can't speak to conspiracy, other than the fact that Rockstar lied to the ESRB about the content present in their game.

Agreed the ESRB did what it should have done (although I would also argue even without the "hot coffee" minigame it should have been AO), but there has been no penalty from them for Rockstar's deceptive behavior. I agree with what Steven Kent said in the press conference w/Lieberman: the ESRB should have refused to rate Rockstar's games for a year or something to punish them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top