[quote name='Vegan']That's the magic variable right there. The PC version needed modification, the console versions needed cheats. Anything like that should not be taken into ratings considerations, and it should not have been recalled/re-rated.[/QUOTE]
What? It was easily accessible to anyone who wanted to see it and therefore SHOULD have been re-rated. It was built into the game, I don't see why the rating shouldn't have reflected that.
[quote name='Ikohn4ever'] meh it was not even in the real game, you had to go out of your way to see it, I really dont see the big deal, If you are mature enough to bash someone's head in with a bat in a video game, you should be mature enough to have sex in a video game.[/quote]
It's the combination of the two that makes it so bad.
[quote name='Odenat']It was incomplete code. It was never meant to be found (well I hope not) and the programmers prolly didn't have the time/cost to go back and remove that specific piece of code so they just locked hoping no one would be able to access it[/quote]
I don't buy that in the slightest. Just because they never told anybody about it doesn't mean it wasn't meant to be found (and who really searches games for sex mini-games?). The clothes were likely left on so hopefully it wouldn't be too huge of a deal once uncovered. Though I might agree if you were to say they didn't want to go too far out of the way that it would deter from the main project.
[quote name='electrictroy']
So does Playboy, but that's labeled "softcore". GTA should be able to be sold anywhere Playboy videos are.[/quote]
Playboys aren't available at Wal-Mart and many of the entertainment stores (and even when they are, they're in a small section and covered up)