This Grand Theft Auto Thing is really starting to piss me off
 

I need help understanding something, now that an 85 year old grandma has decided to sue Rockstar games, because the sex in the game was inappropriate for her 14 year old grandson (but carjacking and killing innocent people amongst the other illegal activites in the game was acceptable for a 14 year old apparantly)...... here's a portion of that story:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...o_game_lawsuit

I just cannot understand why people are in such a fucking uproar over this. Let's get this straight - it's OK for the game to include ridiculous violence, which goes against society's values, but it's NOT OK for it to include sex, which is the reason every person on the planet exists??? Am I missing something here, or has the majority just totally lost their minds?

There is also a lawsuit against the maker of The Sims 2, because there is a mod that allows the characters to be naked and whatnot.

I find it funny too, that killing a gangbanger in a game is just fine, even being able to see his throat slit, but when a girl gets naked, the shit hits the fan.

The U.S. though is quite prude when it comes to nudity on media, compared to say, European countries.

The saddest part about this whole thing is that there isn't even any nudity, just clothed gyrating.

yeah I saw that, about the sims. grandma's got another suit to file.

US is incredibly prude, and that I could handle, but when you combine being prude with the acceptance of violence, that's when I bug out and wonder if it's me or what.

another example - sunday afternoon, about 3pm, braveheart is on USA or TBS - a channel that edits out stuff - anyway, the part when william wallace gets the english guy who killed william's woman - when he slits his throat, you see the knife cut his throat, see blood spilling out of the wound - they decided that could stay in the movie, but a glimpse of maryn's boob was unacceptable. I swear, this is a great country, but sometimes I'm not so proud to be american.

Jesus, she bought it in 2004 so its the PS2 version. The hot coffee mod cannot be accessed on the PS2 (maybe it can with a gameshark addition, I'm not sure). The point is that her grandson has most likely NEVER seen the scenes in the mod.

The thing that makes me upset about this whole ordeal is the simple fact that this game was rated M for mature already. That means the 14 yr old kid shouldn't have had it in the first place. Perhaps grandma or whoever bought it for him should take some responsibity that the kid will be scarred for life by seeing a pair of square tits :rolleyes:

In all honesty, it's the retailers and the parents who should have the ultimate responsiblity here. The game makers and the game watchers have rated it accordingly.. You don't take you 14 yr. old kid to the strip club or take him to shoot people. Get a fucking clue

Amen!!! :thumbsup:

So where's the uproar on Manhunt? You remember that game, right? You're creating snuff films for some shady director and you get rewarded based on how gruesome your kills are. Weapons range from a plastic bag to a shard of glass to a trusty crowbar.

I'm sure that sex is more depraved than that.

Because I didn't follow the story too closely, what was hidden in the game exactly?

Some code that, when patched, allowed you to have sex with your in-game girlfriend. It was buried in the code from what I understand. Something leftover from testing. It was probably a joke by the programmers that never got taken out.

Sheeit. Let's get the grandma in trouble, she shouldn't have let him have it in the first place. IT'S RATED M, YA DUMB BITCH. And then she tries to cover her ass up by suing the company for a part of the game that's not even accessible in the version the kid has!

This is one of the fundemental flaws in the USA's moral system. Sex, something that is PERFECTLY FUCKING NATURAL, is taboo. Violence, not as natural as sex, is embraced and ignored as a problem.

Go to any other country, and there's a nice balance.

I mean, come on, what's more natural than sex? So why don't we want our kids to know about it? I feel that the taboo has grown so much out of proportion that it's sleezy. And I fucking hate that. It's even helped make this country "over-weight". There's so many skinny people that're idolized, that we care too much about our weight. We panick, we become so obsessed, man. Sorry, I kinda got off subject, but I need to get that off my chest.

A videocap of the scene in question is (or, perhaps, was) available here: http://www.gtasanandreas.net/news/single.php?id=1469

Gotta make a buck somehow. Why not ride the wave and profit from it?

Want to fight it? Start writing to your representatives. Show all of them how even keeled and well mannered you are from playing Manhunt and GTA all the time. Just keep the number of 'fuck's below five.

I do believe the blame for access lies with parental responsibility. But complaining about this issue here is like preaching to the choir.

JESUS H MOTHERFUCKING CHRIST. The HOT COFFEE mod CANNOT be accessed without changing the FUCKING code in the game. It is NOT in the retail version. You cannot access it in the regular game. You have to tamper with the code, making it an unofficial game in order to see the clothed gyrating, as someone else put it. The characters are made nude through a mod that is NOT EVEN CREATED by Rockstar.

Do all of the idiots in the world flock together or something? It's NOT in the mother fucking game, end of story. It was left in as either a prank or a cancelled portion of the game. You have to fuck with the coding to unlock it. It was not meant to be in the game, period. The people who are getting uptight about the sex in San Andreas do not realize this. They have no grounds whatsoever. Sorry for going apeshit but this is really starting to piss me off. Rockstar is being treated like criminals for something they didn't even fucking do.

IT'S NOT IN THE GAME!@! It's not false advertising because it's not in the game. It's not deception because it's not in the game. It's not unfair business practices because a fucking nerd from the Netherlands DID this, not Rockstar. ARRGHHHHH

-Lasereth

I bet Jack Thompson is representing this bitch

you folks are missing a crucial point... she's suing on behalf of all consumers- how much money are you going to collect from this suit? :D

I don't want any money from this. It's like taking money for every person killed in the war. Ok bad bad bad example but it's just asanine. It's like me suing M$ for someone hacking the code and giving me a virus... hey wait a minute.. I think I'm on to something here..

anyone wanna join me? :rolleyes:

Welcome to the US, you can sue anyone for anything. Why be a parent hell even if you do not mind the thing, if you can try to get some money go for it!

This is the kind of shit that makes valid lawsuits bad.

I'm an attorney. Let's say Florence came into my office and the following conversation took place:

F: My grandson has GTA:SA. He's 14 and I want to sue.

AVOR: How did he get it?

F: I bought it for him.

AVOR: Any idea what that letter "M" means?

F: No.

AVOR: It means you need to pay me Money for this consultation, and be More careful next time you buy things for your spawn's spawn. Have a nice day.

Where I'm not too clear here is how she got a lawyer to take this; if by the hour, she's an idiot beyond what we've already established (and to be fair, my mother-in-law is 83, and could make a mistake like that if one of her grandkids asked for something). If on a percentage of the take, then the lawyer's an idiot. Take Two will have to fight this tooth and nail to discourage other such claims.

I can almost guarantee that Thompson is representing her. He's brought several cases against Vice City and San Andreas. I don't think he's won a penny from R* or Take Two and I really don't think he cares if he does. All that matters to him is spreading his message to the people who have no clue what the game is about. The game allows you to kill hookers. Hookers, like everybody else have money so it's a way to get your money back. Never is it mentioned in the game or any official release from R* that you can get with hookers. He says "it encourages you to have sex with hookers and kill them to get your money back" and it sticks. The statements about the hookers are lies and so is this but it doesn't stop him from saying it and it doesn't stop clueless people who have never even seen the box the game comes in from repeating it.

IMO, R* and Take Two should file slander (or libel, whichever one is applicable) lawsuits against Thompson. Fight fire with fire. He is obviously lying about it for his own benefit.

I agree. I would Pledge Allegiance to Rockstar if they counterfiled a case against all of those ignorant pricks saying that GTA:SA is corrupting their youth with sex scenes that aren't even in the retail game.

-Lasereth

To be fair though, R* did NOT handle this properly when the story broke. They attempted to portray it as entirely mod created, not just simply a mod that replaces a few files. Other than that, I stand behind R*. This was NOT intended for public viewing and they are not responsible for this. The AO rating is asinine.

I read an interview with the Rockstar President. Their first press release supposedly said that the content was only available by tampering with the game's code. When asked if they ever told the press that it was not in the game period, the CEO gave a firm "no." I'm wondering if the press, who obviously doesn't understand videogame coding/modding, took what Rockstar said about it not being in the retail version as saying that it's not their work at all. I'm betting the press fucked that aspect of it up as well.

This is the answer that the media is in an uproar about for no reason. The CEO clearly explains that you cannot access the content without a mod that was created entirely by "hackers." In no way did Rockstar say that the content was not in the game...but the content is not accessible without a user-created mod that alters the source code.

-Lasereth

I'll try this one. No money but probably what's left of the remaining 15 minutes? Tickety tick,..tickety tock,......

Next week I'm gonna sue the Jockey Boxer Briefs people. It seems my left nut is allergic to the 100% combed cotton causing the right nut extreme grief and displeasure, not to mention a severe case of lethargy. Wish me luck.

well, obviously I am not concerned because my 15 year old step-daughter is playing right now. Bad parent, bad parent...

Funny, she sues now that something new has been discovered to sue over.

Nothing wrong with shooting someone in the head at point blank range and beating their corpse repeatedly, as long as little Tommy doesn't have to be exposed to those boobies.

The judge should charge her money for wasting his, and the court's, time.

If you've been a good parent and taught your step-daughter the difference between fantasy and reality, she's fine. Sadly, a lot of kids seem to lack that nowadays.

I remember when the Nude patch for Tomb Raider came out back in like 96. I should sue for that because I was like 14 at the time. OH MY VIRGIN EYES!

What a crock of shit.

CRX Forum

Think of the lesson for the child.

Use something that is not attended for you and then get upset and blame someone else because it contains inappropriate material. It just boggles my mind how illogical people are.

I don't understand the following:

'According to the suit, she directed that it be taken away from her grandson, which was done.'

Was this when she bought the game in 2004 and realized the game was rated outside his age group or has he been playing the game for a year and now that she heard about the mod she has taken it away? If she took it away immediately after purchase she should have gotten a refund (or do games have the same return as software, no opened packages). If that is the case then when and how did the kid view the material in question.

There is no indication in the article that the kid (or even the Grandmother) actually altered their game and viewed the material.

I'm on the first ship to Mars. Aliens, come save me from this fucked up world, please.

R* GTA:SA <- Bandwagon, lets it roll past.

I seriously begin to wonder about the sanity and mental capacity of the majority of people, how does this even get considered? Surely its actually a crime to buy games like this for kids (presumably similar to alcohol for underagers)... R* do some weird games, personally I don't play them (though I would like to code em!) however movies etc seem to get away with far more, which seems rather biased.

Ohh well, common sense surrendered years ago (wanders off commenting on chainsaws with "Do not stop with hand or groin" warning on them).

The saddest part is that I've seen asinine suits like hers actually win, which only further encourages these people to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions.

Really? Which ones have you seen win? None like this come to mind for me, and the media is pretty good about reporting them.

Not saying there aren't any, I'm just asking to have my memory jogged.

This is an act of Mass Tort

Read the King of Torts by John Grisham.

:) It's just suing for money.

For those of you who get a chuckle out of Maddox's rants, here's a good one about the GTA charade: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....ticket_to_hell

Didn't I read somewhere recently that this coffee shop thing, with banging the hooker is accessible on the PS2 version? And if this is the case, wouldn't that mean that it wasn't hacking that made it possible, but that it was actually a part of the game?

This is totally devil's advocate by the way, even if the above is true, I think the whole thing is bullshit. In the previous game before San Andreas, you could get hookers to come into your car, bang you (the whole car shook, and sounds came out) and you health went up. That wasn't even a hack, and people never complained about that... I just don't get it.

The old lady who sued McDonald's when she spilled her coffee won, if my memory serves correctly.

There was also a case in a preliminary phase I read about wherein this man was attempting to sue NBC/"Fear Factor" because he became sick while watching a "Fear Factor" segment that grossed him out and that "he couldn't change the channel quickly enough." I don't know how that turned out, though.

There are others I know, but none are sticking out at the moment.

The McDonald's case was not a frivilous lawsuit. First, she WON at trial, she wasn't paid to go away. What you didn't hear on Leno or Letterman (or whichever source that carries McDonalds advertisements) was that this was the 700th complaint McDonalds had received about serious burns to its customers from the coffee being about 20 degrees hotter than other major chains. It was unfit for human consumption at the temperature it was served (190 degrees F). She spilled it when she was trying to add sugar--the vehicle was stopped--and there were several thousands of dollars of skin grafts done to repair damage to her genitals. There was nothing frivilous about that case--just the way it was reported by the mass media.

Here's a link to a full explanation http://www.mcmahanlawfirm.com/www/docs/127-86

As for the Fear Factor suit, get back with me if this guy ever gets a penny; I'll be shocked.

And if you think of any others, let me know--I'm interested in just how much money is actually paid out on frivilous lawsuits.

The fear factor case got thrown out by the judge.