Interesting. In your linked thread, you said:
Technically correct, I guess. It appears that doe-eyed 9 year olds can.
Of the 58 stores targeted, 32 sold mature-rated games to minors as young as nine.
My point exactly. It’s not like Rockstar is selling “Grand Porn Auto: San Andreas” to 3-year-olds. Kids shouldn’t be playing GTA in the first place, because it’s not for kids, so the existence of the code in the game shouldn’t matter, and the people that discovered it didn’t do a thing wrong.
In the same spirit, fuck Charles Schumer.
In this case, Rockstar (the game developer) contends that the person who made the mod created the sex minigame by himself. The mod-maker says that the sex is already present on the game disc, and all his code does is make it available. I’d link to the site, but it breaks the two-click rule; in this case, a single screenshot of a pixelated nude mannequin.
Looking at the size of the modified files versus the size of the originals, you can check to see if a large amount of material has been added. The modified files are almost exactly the same size as the originals. The book analogy would be more like if every copy of the book sold had a few pages of pronographic material rubberbanded together, and somebody comes along and cuts the rubber band for you.
In the condition the game is sold, it is impossible to access this content. So why is it even in there? As I see it, the developers either were too lazy to take it out after it was cut, didn’t have time to optimize the code put to the disc, or secretly hoped some enterprising fellow would come along and look at the files on the disc.
And for Og’s sake, in a game with a storyline (i.e., the things the player must do to finish the game) concerning Mafia families, crooked cops, gang warfare, and drug dealers, these people are getting upset over consentual sex (heterosexual, even, if it matters).
Imagine if the mod unlocked the ability to have the title character give some huge, hairy, Italian mob boss head.
From what I’ve read about the mod, there is a difference of opinion about the origins. The modders claim it was already in the game code, and the company says that it’s all third-party code. There was an article posted in the last week about the possibility of a lawsuit; this must be what got Hilary’s attention in the first place.
Or they thought “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Any change can potentially introduce new bugs, so if management comes to you a month before the shipping date and says they changed their minds about including a sex minigame, it’s easiest to leave the code in there and just disable it. It’s not laziness, it’s a reasonable way to reduce QA time. Most games and applications, I would expect, contain code that isn’t used.
Hear, hear. A kid who is never exposed to anything his parents don’t want him to see is likely to grow up prudish and naive.
True. I thought I was covering that under the second part, but I guess I didn’t use the lingo right. In terms of preferability:
- It’s removed, all references are removed, and the game works.
- It’s still there, all references are removed, and the game works.
- It’s still there, the references are still there, the game works, the game gets an AO rating and the developer sees money disappear as mainstream retailers refuse to carry it.
- The game doesn’t work.
The final product was at 2, which was fine. Somebody came along later and put the references back in. It’s not optimal, but it works with the only problem being a little more disk space being used up; as long as it all fits on the disk anyway, nobody’s going to notice. Unless somebody violates the EULA by tinkering with the code, and nobody does that, right (wink wink)?
Its as if shes trying to appeal to conservatives. AN odd thing, as I think they dislike her immensely.
Actually, I would imagine that it’s more like someone gluing the pages together and somebody figured out how to unstick them.
… by using a third-party product designed specifically as a way to give you access to those pages, and advertised as a way to turn your regular book into a pornographic version. No one is in danger of being accidentally exposed to this minigame; they have to go out of their way and modify the game to enable it.
… pages that have been sewn into the book lining so you’d never even known they were missing until somebody had told you. Can we stretch this metaphor any further? 
Which is why she feels she has to appeal to them, I’d wager.
I’m a card carrying Clinton hater but this one time that annoying b*tch happens to be right. Heck I even took the time to register so that I could post this reply.
Hillary is asking for an investigation. Which she has every right to do and actually in this case makes sense. Rockstar the publishers of GTA SA stated that the content was added by the mod. This is untrue. The content is in the game and can be accessed by adding the mod or doing a bunch of crazy stuff which takes to long and is far too annoying. Much easier to just get the Hot Coffee mod.
Rockstar lied :eek:
Hillary is right :smack:
I hate myself. Going to go sulk now.
No, it really really doesn’t make sense.
Wasting the time and money of investigators on a video game that can be used to have cartoon sex really really REALLY doesn’t make sense.
Totally disagree. Calling for an investigation is stupid. As I and others have already pointed out, even if the content was deliberately put in there by the designers, it can only be accessed by a deliberate action on the part of the user, and, more importantly, the game even without the mod is completely inappropriate for children, so they shouldn’t be playing it in the first place.
Well, I’m glad that we’re finally discussing the Senator’s actions.
If this game is really that toxic (dubious, IMHO, but lots feel otherwise) then calling for enforcement of pre-existing rating policies doesn’t sound so awful.
What would be awful? Advocating a pre-emptive ban on a video game sounds awful to me, even if the game itself is offensive. Shame on you, Senator Schumer. Admittedly, I’m only seeing moral suasion at work; I hope that Schumer isn’t considering censorship.
You know, that part I’m fine with. The ratings system can and should be a tool to help parents screen out inappropriate games for their kids. The rating system is totally voluntary right now, though, so I’m just not sure how much the gov’t should be getting involved with this. On the one hand, I would like to see retailers enforcing the age limits better, but on the other, I don’t really want to create a nanny state so that parents don’t have to pay attention to what their kids are doing.
Violence can - no, must - be ignored on a cultural level because a government as violent as ours would look pretty hypocritical doing otherwise. Also, a certain level of violence in society is desirable as a rationale for justifying social control.
In other words, violence is useful. Sex isn’t nearly so.
Why no outrage about this game?