off topic...the "Hot Coffie" mod

[gdogghenrikson]

what is your opinion about the "Hot Coffie" mod for GTA: San Andreas.

what is your opinion about the game now getting an AO rating.

Do you think that it could affect the modding cumunity for all games, not just sh3

[R Hardman]

Hard to tell. As the graphics get more realistic and computing power getting cheaper it is bound to happen and I'm sure there will be more to come. Here is my spin on this. I think the company knew that this would appeal to the target audiance but if it got an AO rating the sales would never get off the ground since most retail outlets do not carry AO rated games. So they pulled a fast one. Just goes to show you that the "buck" is the only think that drives business and out weighs morality. As a parent I depend on these ratings to screen CD's, games, TV for my kids. If someone wants to buy an AO rated game who cares. But to ship a game that the company knew the content and hid it just to get an M rating just shows that the leadership of that company is to put it nice... bad. As to you last question, who knows. May take longer to get a game released due to a new governmet office to screen it or games may become more controlled in what can be modded. Remember awhile back someone wanted to mod those women on the docks!

[Immacolata]

Have you checked what the difference is between Mature and AO ratings? Basically nothing, Mature rating was invented so that you could peddle your wares to the masses in warehouses owned by prudent yet mercilessly exploiting texan families.

[snowsub]

Storm in a Teacup

The company may have left the code in the game unimplemented, but the fact is that the characters are wearing cloths.
Simulated sex with fully clothed polygon characters in a third party hacked mod, causing this much fuss from narrowminded politicans and conservatives who have nothing better to do than complain about things they don't like, have never seen, or played for that matter.

Give me a break.

Oooh, can't have simulated sex being seen by minors who aren't supposed to even own the game cause they're too young for the rating it is under. But they can watch TV with violence and implied sex/moral decadence and the like on any channel you care to name.

What's next, ban alcohol, R rated movies, Driving, Voting etc cause some minor can potentially do/use it???

Do the parent's not have any say in how they bring up they're kids?
Sure they can sprout that the children will do those things when they're not looking etc but they are still responcible. Same as if they owned a gun and "little" Johnny killed the neighbours cat with it.

And the sure-fire way to make anyone do something is to tell them not to do it.

Why is parts of america scared of nudity etc (that isn't even implemented in what thay are complaining about in this mod). Seems to me they're the type of people who say "tut tut, that's depraved", then do worse behind closed doors.

Yes, I own, the game.
But the thought of watching polygons have sex just doesn't interest/stimulate me.
Maybe they should have a hard look at those kids who do find it titilating.

End of Rant

[Shadow9216]

Snowsub- are you saying the scenes in GTA-SA are non-nude? The screenshots (and some video) I've seen were fully-nude and left nothing to the imagination.

I agree with you 100% however. The "moral" movement seems to have ignored personal responsibility.

It's the "Married With Children" debacle all over again...when the show first aired it was "edgy" and someone had issues with it ("Oh! Won't someone think of the CHILDREN!") and tried to organize a boycott of Fox sponsors. Some affiliates even dropped the show. Fortunately Fox refused to give in to this censorship. Not that I thought the show was that great, but I don't like someone else determining what's "appropriate" for me (BTW I'm 34, not 13 pics on my website to prove it- including some of me "fighting for democracy and personal freedom").

What happened to voting with your feet/pocketbook? I hear plenty of people on this board claiming they won't support UBI if/unless...lots of folks understand the economics of not supporting a company whose practices you disagree with. So why can't all these moralists?

Don't tell me what to watch, what to buy, where to live, or who to worship! </rant>

[snowsub]

Originally Posted by Shadow9216

Snowsub- are you saying the scenes in GTA-SA are non-nude? The screenshots (and some video) I've seen were fully-nude and left nothing to the imagination.

<snip> </rant>

As I have read the description of it, as it was stock, the Girfriends and CJ are in whatever cloths they are wearing at the time, but there is also another part of it where the Modder has given the Girlfriend and CJ a Nude Skin.
(Just like if someone here made a nude skin of the Crew in our subs - Ew, I'm sure we wouldn't want to see that either, the watch officer making eyes at us while nude, no thank you... Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

So with regards to the code, they are wereing the cloths they had at the time. In which case with CJ you can only go down to his underwear (boxers). And the girlfriend into her normal cloths.

Also Note that there is no Male genitalia 3D wise on CJ's model, so if you could actually see anything it would be pic only.

Hope that clears things

[tycho102]

Originally Posted by Immacolata

Have you checked what the difference is between Mature and AO ratings?

Sex. That's the difference. Movies get an R-rating for that. But if you've got Anakin severing limbs, and George Lucas giving you $10m for a good rating, you get PG-13. I could get into the entire religious side of the reasons, but I'm looking to keep this "on topic".

I'm totally not kidding, either. Kickbacks are universal. Priests get kickbacks. :rotfl:

[macstu23]

Am i reading this right ? A game has had its rating altered because of a mod ?
Utterly ridiculous...still, in the age when neo-con republicans believe that ceasing supply of condoms to teenagers will stop them from having sex, it doesnt really surprise me.
Naked bodies are utterly evil, and even the tiniest glimpse of one..especially, god-forbid, a mans penis, will turn us all into depraved homosexual orgi-astic perverts, bringing society as we know it to an abrupt end.

Not so long ago it was 'video nasties' that were corrupting our youth.
I wonder what'll be next. Forcing us to put clothes on pets when out in public ?

Okay, finished my rant.

[JBClark]

Originally Posted by macstu23

Am i reading this right ? A game has had its rating altered because of a mod ?
Utterly ridiculous...still, in the age when neo-con republicans believe that ceasing supply of condoms to teenagers will stop them from having sex, it doesnt really surprise me.
Naked bodies are utterly evil, and even the tiniest glimpse of one..especially, god-forbid, a mans birthday cake, will turn us all into depraved homosexual orgi-astic perverts, bringing society as we know it to an abrupt end.

Not so long ago it was 'video nasties' that were corrupting our youth.
I wonder what'll be next. Forcing us to put clothes on pets when out in public ?

Okay, finished my rant.

I understand the rant but this was not done by "neo-con republicans." It was the doing of our next president (crossing myself and looking for garlic to hang around my neck) Hillary Clinton. Reminescent of her pal Tipper Gore a few decades ago when she caused a bunch of musicians to be hauled in front of congress to explain themselves. Its about getting votes.

[Egan]

If parents want to object about the effect stuff like this has on children, they should probably stop buying them for their kids.....

I do agree with JB, though, it is not just about GOP versus Democrat, nor is it an issue that rests soley with the religious wings.

Personally, I just object to being told how to act, think and feel.

[CCIP]

To be perfectly honest though, I think the whole GTA thing is pretty tricky with marketing, too. As much as I'm against censorship, I really don't think it's a kids' game to start with. It takes a certain amount of responsible thinking to really get past its' questionable presentation.

But I do find it hilarious when they jump on hidden sex content while forgetting about violent content. That reminds me of how a few years back I couldn't stop laughing at how my friend's grandparents were perfectly OK with him playing the most disgustingly graphical violent games, and yet would ground him for even a hint of a nipple showing up on his screen :rotfl:

[macstu23]

Originally Posted by CCIP

As much as I'm against censorship, I really don't think it's a kids' game to start with.

Absolutely right. Responsibility lies with the parents. There was that recent case of a young boy..13 i think, violently killing one of his peers in a manner he'd picked up from a video game, the name of which ecapes me. While such cases are extremely rare, it was clearly marked with an 18 certificate, but the parents tried to blame the developers. Normal children dont do such things, so whatever it was that made the kid do that, would have manifested itself one way or another whether he'd played the game or not.

Anyway, thanks to all the controversy, I'll be buying myself GTA San Andreas to go with the other two, soon as I can. Rockstar are a Scottish company so I have to give them support.

[CCIP]

Well I mean, even if your parents allow you to play games like that, I think it's up to them to explain violence and its' consequences. I played games like Doom, Quake and so on since I was 11 or 12. And yet I'm one of the least violent people (in real life) that I can honestly think of, mainly because my understanding of violence comes from places other than video games.

I don't think it's right to blame video games, but there really needs to be some sort of responsibility on behalf of parents. If they're worried about their kids growing up because of games, perhaps they should cut the games. :hmm:

[oxonian2001]

Actually, I think R Hardman got closest to the real issue. We can debate what kids should and should not be allowed to look at and play, and we can blame parents for not exercising supervision. The whole point of the ESRB, however, is to make it possible for a parent to decide what little Johnny gets to play. Rather than forcing parents to rely upon rumors, stories, and politicians to figure out how scandalous the game is, the ESRB is supposed to explain it all very clearly on the outside of the box.

Rockstar, however, wasn't satisfied with this system. Instead, they decided to include sexually explicit scenes in GTA:SA while taking care to conceal that fact. Note that Rockstar, not modders, created these scenes and included them in both the PC and the PS2 versions. The "Hot Coffee" mod really just unlocks already-present content, and if little Johnny owns GTA:SA on the PS2, he doesn't even need the mod. The purpose was clear: Rockstar wanted to sell sexually explicit material, but they didn't want the ESRB, retailers, or parents to know.

Sure, there's a lot of hypocrisy and base motives surrounding the outrage. And, of course, it seems odd to a lot of people that anyone would think GTA:SA was appropriate for kids even without "Hot Coffee." That doesn't change the fact that Rockstar intentionally and deliberately set out to deceive the ESRB, retailers, and parents. That is not acceptable or excusable.

[Beery]

This whole thing is ridiculous. I mean GTA is one of the most pornographically violent games ever made, yet the people who are complaining about the game are worried about the sex. I mean you can kill thousands of people in the game, brutally knifing or bludgeoning them to death, and the busybodies are fine with that (apart from a bit of grumbling) but if you have a sex scene in it they are all over it like a cheap suit. I think these folks need to get some perspective. They need to recognise and accept that sex is a perfectly normal and healthy part of life, unlike the violence.

There seems to be a big disconnect with these folks when they can accept violence on a vast scale in a game or movie, yet they start foaming at the mouth when a game or a movie occasionally portrays the act of procreation.