In case you haven't heard...
This is the major news going around in the video game industry right now, and as that's an industry I've wanted to be in for a while now, it's something of interest to me.
First, the backstory: GTA Mod Generates Criticism
Next, the development: Clinton Seeks Tighter Game Regulation
Finally, the shocking conclusion: San Andreas Now for Adults Only
I felt it necessary to share my comments on the story.
1) Oh, wow. Rockstar did something shocking. Who'da thunk it.
2) I think it was Laura Ingraham who pointed out what a terrible politician Hillary is because whenever she tries to make political maneuvers to make herself more mainstream, it's bleedingly obvious what she's trying to do.
3) Why the hell is the rating for all versions of the game (PC, X-Box, PS2) being changed when the graphic content is only unlockable on the PC version? I mean, how do you hack a PS2 game? The thing doesn't even ship with a hard drive to save patches on! This is clearly a case of over-reacting.
4) Again, shame on Rockstar for even including the filth in the development process, but how much can you really blame Rockstar for "putting pornographic material in the hands of children"? I mean, the game was rated "M" to begin with, indicating no one under 17 should be playing it. Can you hold Dreamworks responsible because the guy sitting in front of me brought his 5-year-old son to see Gladiator?
5) I'm curious about how easy it is to unlock the content. If it was a very difficuly patch to create that required some expert hackers, then I don't see how you could hold Rockstar responsible for it anymore than you could hold Valve responsible if someone made a naked Alex mod for HL2 or even holding Crayola responsible for giving kids the tools to draw porn. (Honestly, it's probably easier for kids to just download porn straight off the net than to go through the trouble of patching GTA to include it.) However, if the hack is something simple (like use a hex editor to change a 0 to a 1 in the save game), then it's completely Rockstar's fault for not removing the content from the game before launch.
6) Too bad GTA is selling so well. I hope Rockstar eventually goes broke and dies for producing such trash. But they need to last at least long enough to make Max Payne 3.
7) It's interesting to note that GTA got great reviews from all the gaming press. That ties in with my "Why are geeks amoral liberals?" rant from a few days ago.
I've been following this story too, and here's what I've been able to decipher. Rockstar created the "mini-game" but intentionally left it inaccessible (or so they thought). Then some people (probably hackers) discovered the content was there, and figured out that the content COULD BE ACCESSED in an unmodified version of the game through an extremely long and elaborate series of steps that the programmers didn't realize would unlock the content. Then a modder created a mod that made the content very easy to get to (basically undoing the programmers' obfuscations). The mini-game was demonstrated on the PS2 version on Attack of the Show on G4. Gamespot has also claimed they were able to access it on a PS2.
ReplyDeleteWhen the content was first discovered, Rockstar claimed it was created by a user mod and not by them. When it was discovered to be accessible from an unmodded version of the game, they admitted the lied before and that they did create the content, but left it disabled. Obviously they failed.
I think the change in rating is absolutely appropriate and I also think the GTA games (since GTA3) should all be rated AO. The M rating is the game equivalent of an R, but it is not enforced by anyone. Only the AO rating is actually enforced by retailers. Ratings are meaningless if neither retailers or parents pay attention and the fact is that no one under 17 should be allowed to play GTA, period. Rockstar has made a habit of generating controversy for publicity purposes. They deserve to go bankrupt, but it will never happen because one of the most violent and depraved games ever made for consoles also happens to be the best selling game.
Shame on Rockstar, shame on any parent who lets their kids play their games, and shame on adults who take delight in this kind of depravity.
Thanks for the clarification on that Dave. I was unaware that the content was accessible from console versions of the game.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the "M" rating not being enforced, almost every major games retailer (Wal-Mart, Gamestop, EB Games, etc.) has a policy of not selling M-rated games to minors. I have actually seen employees at a Gamestop tell a kid that he could not buy an M-rated game, and I have heard cases of employees telling parents that they should not buy titles for their children because they are M-rated. How universally this is enforced is another question.
The AO rating will force retailers to pull it from their shelves, as most retailers have a policy of not even carrying AO titles.
I think that the GTA series of games sell so well because they are well designed games that are fun to play, or at least that may have been the initial reason behind their popularity. I haven't played them myself, nor do I ever intend on playing those games. I think that the smut factor has two fronts. 1.) It creates some publicity that draws in people who might otherwise not be interested in it. 2.) It is meant to weaken a person's conscience against the vicious action carried out in a virtual universe.
ReplyDeleteI think that #2 is largely the core reason for this content. Some of their games are just vile (like Manhunt). Aside from diabolical and evil intentions, I simply can't think of any other reasons for the content in some of their games.
Rockstar's games are favorably panned by game critics because they are usually well made--actual content does not factor into the equation (unless it was outright racist). It is similar to film critics.
May God have mercy on (and justice for) the powers in charge at Rockstar.
The more I think about this, the more I wonder if it's just a publicity stunt by Rockstar. I mean, how do you "accidentally" leave content that shouldn't be accessible in a game. Do you suppose that they left it there intentionally, knowing that hackers would find it? That way they can sell the game with an M rating and avoid the AO ban of stores like Wal-Mart, but have AO content in it.
ReplyDeleteIf anything, the buzz about GTA:SA has only served to increase popularity and demand for the game, and I think Rockstar probably could have guessed that's what would happen.
I suppose it may be a conspiracy theory, but it's slightly more plausible than the Philadelphia Project or the faked moon landings, but what if Rockstar intentionally left the content accessible, then leaked the hack to unlock it? Now that the game has been out for a while, sales start to decrease and popularity wanes. It seems like a perfect time to leak the hack and pick up demand. That would be a publicity stunt almost on par with some of Acclaim's.
Yet no one complains about the ladies "romance" novel section at bookstores. Due to the nature of books being produce of thought, they are much cheaper to generate, distribute, and obtain by the comsumer.
ReplyDeleteRomance novelists are also some of the most prolific of writers, churning out dozens of full novels in a year. All of which are consumed by the truckload and redistributed through second-hand book sellers often only being traded for pennies.
So, large quantities of inexpensive non-controlled smut is available to non-technosavy people for the cost of pennies. This seems to be a far greater threat to civilian morality than unlocking lockedout content in product with content warnings.
However, worse content in other media is not justified by obsene content in other media.
~TBF
I've heard the romance novels referred to as "chick porn". It is essentially porn for women. Men are aroused by pictures, where as women are more so by feelings and playing to their emotions (I guess).
ReplyDeleteBut you're right no one (except me) ever complains about it. Another good way of getting yourself laughed out of just about anywhere is by saying "romance novels are immoral because they're just another form of pornography and we need 'parental advisories' and controls on them to make sure they don't land in the hands of young girls". Whereas making a similar statement about Playboy will only get you flamed off internet message boards, while getting nods of approval from the rest of the country, that statement about romance novels will get you flamed out of the country.