Posted on 07/27/2005 2:09:16 PM PDT by wingnutx
A giant M 17+ on the box and after the fact she complains it's not appropriate for her 14 year old. Clearly she's an idiot.
It does have a rating label, plus very descriptive text on the back cover of any game.
Wrong. As a parent, you have an obligation to be consistent.
The game was intended for those over 17.
If you have an issue with adult material, you have it unconditionally. If you have an issue with "wizardry" (as you imply with your description of Yu-Gi-Oh), then you have it unconditionally.
That being said, the Rockstar folks went too far.
But this woman doing the suing is an idiot, and I hope she loses her shirt.
your= year
Game is marked 17+ if this isn't thrown out of court I'll be suprised. (Well, probably not suprised but certainly disgusted)
At first they said it was not there, when it was. Then they admitted it was there all along.
The tort lawyers will latch onto that apparent intent to decieve like a slug on a mushroom.
Hey, I dislike tort cases like this too, but I think that's what will happen.
Hmm, isn't President Hillary interested in video games, GTA in particular? Wonder if the grandmother in this case knows her.
I guess the closest analogy I can come up with is this. Many DVDs come with "Easter Eggs." Which are little undocumented featurettes that play when you enter certain combinations of buttons on a remote. Imagine if you bought a DVD that was rated PG-13, but had an "Easter Egg" that brought up a porn scene. Should the studio then be liable?
They are responsible for the code they sell. If the code is there, it is their responsibility. The fact that you need a hack to access it is irrelevant. They put the code there, so they have to answer for it.
The cynical would say that this is all a ploy by the manufacturer to generate a second wave of interest in a game that was successful largely on the strength of being controversial. After a year, people were acclimated to what was previously controversial (the theft and murder), so the company releases the code to access the hidden sex through a back channel...
Brilliant marketing, but just plain illegal. The company should be made to pay, big time. I don't think they should lose all profits, as the suit asks. But I would not be upset to see them lose all profits realized since the hack became common knowledge.
Or do you think this hack was innocently discovered by some third party?
Well, that's not much of a "buy" recommendation!
This one was rated the equivalent of R or NC-17 in the first place.
Also, the added content is actually tame compared to the game itself.
If course if it depicted gay sex, Hillary wouldn't have had a problem with it.
Yeah I though they were weak. I though that the Vice City Missions were better laid out. I though the game needed a couple of more characters since the ones from Vice city just seemed more developed. Though I do admit that I did like the cameos of GTA3 guy, Catalina, Rosenburg, and Kent Paul(wanted a Tommy Vercetti). As a whole I though that the game enviroment itself was outstanding while the missions were just kinda blah.....
As if the rhythmically-rocking car with the hooker in it (with moaning for those that don't get the visual cue), the bedroom dialog from the "cold coffee" (complete with subtitles for the "dense"), drug-running, wanton-killing complete with bloody beheadings and de-limbings, and carjacking (it is Grand Theft Auto, after all) were appropriate content for 14-year-olds. The old "M for Mature" warning sticker says "Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs" (emphasis added).
Further, it's the PS2 version the grandma and her money-grubbing lawyer are suing over, where all one needs is an Action Replay device and the necessary codes to get the "Hot Coffee" content (no downloads necessary, and NO way for Rockstar to stop it through a patch).
And they'll get it. Stock tip; short Take-Two Interactive.
It's nice to see that Congress has fixed every other problem in the country and can now go after pixel nudity.
I don't know... it's hard to beat Ryder as a character. Sweet should've gotten a little more development, but I thought SA was better than Vice City overall.
(The GTA3 guy's name is Claude Speed, BTW.)
Why can't it just be enough for them to remove the games and ship new ones with the scenes taken out? No money for the lawyers that's why.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.