Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
R* about to be in deep **** again?
- Thread starter sikkinixx
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You know, I'm getting to the point where I can't stand this company either. Seems like now all they're out to do is try and skate the 'thin line' they're walking on as tightly as possible, as well as rattle good 'ol Jack Thompson's cage and send him on another crusade every chance they get.
Truthfully though, I'm really not surprised. What's easier and cheaper...re-coding a game to bypass a certain portion (ie Hot Coffee) but leaving in the existing Hot Coffee code, or re-writing a game in its entirety with completely new code that has no Hot Coffee. Yep...re-coding and leaving the unmentionables in. I'm not surprised they did this and I'm sure that people will find the same code on the other releases.
Paging Jack Thompson...paging Jack Thompson...
Truthfully though, I'm really not surprised. What's easier and cheaper...re-coding a game to bypass a certain portion (ie Hot Coffee) but leaving in the existing Hot Coffee code, or re-writing a game in its entirety with completely new code that has no Hot Coffee. Yep...re-coding and leaving the unmentionables in. I'm not surprised they did this and I'm sure that people will find the same code on the other releases.
Paging Jack Thompson...paging Jack Thompson...
I have zero sympathy for R* or those who demonize them. I don't like the whole violence for violence's sake crap that goes on in video games and movies these days, but I'm not going to say that the movies and games can't be made (should they be made is another question, but I'm not going to stomp on anyone's freedom of speech just because I disagree with what they are saying).
However you won't see me defend the creators when they are slapped with an A.O. or NC-17 rating, or when they are chastised or punished for not removing bits that were supposed to be removed. You made that movie/game, now live with the consequences. Sure it's easier to bypass the unused code than to remove it completely, but if you're going to leave it there you should know that someone will figure out how to access it (Hot Coffee should have already proven this to R*).
As for parents, there is a bit of a gap right now with parents who grew up before the internet and video games were as big as they are now. Unfortunately this also makes them not-as-aware of all of what is going on in games or what can happen on the internet, and they don't really care to find out. It's something their kids do, and their friends have these games so how bad could they be? We're in a gap right now where kids can pull the wool over their parents' eyes because the parents aren't aware of the content in games and the net.
Over the next 5-10 years this will change but they will introduce something new that parents won't be able to control/or have knowledge of and once again it will be the technology's fault rather than the inattentive parents. I'd look to sites like MySpace and Facebook (although they've already had troubles associated wit them), and cell phones for the next bit of damnable technology to become the whipping post while people campaigning against video games will get about as much attention as movie protests do now. Time moves on and the method for delivery of objectionable materials change. There will always be objectionable material out there, kids will seek it and they will usually succeed in finding it on the technology that their parents have the least familiarity with.
However you won't see me defend the creators when they are slapped with an A.O. or NC-17 rating, or when they are chastised or punished for not removing bits that were supposed to be removed. You made that movie/game, now live with the consequences. Sure it's easier to bypass the unused code than to remove it completely, but if you're going to leave it there you should know that someone will figure out how to access it (Hot Coffee should have already proven this to R*).
As for parents, there is a bit of a gap right now with parents who grew up before the internet and video games were as big as they are now. Unfortunately this also makes them not-as-aware of all of what is going on in games or what can happen on the internet, and they don't really care to find out. It's something their kids do, and their friends have these games so how bad could they be? We're in a gap right now where kids can pull the wool over their parents' eyes because the parents aren't aware of the content in games and the net.
Over the next 5-10 years this will change but they will introduce something new that parents won't be able to control/or have knowledge of and once again it will be the technology's fault rather than the inattentive parents. I'd look to sites like MySpace and Facebook (although they've already had troubles associated wit them), and cell phones for the next bit of damnable technology to become the whipping post while people campaigning against video games will get about as much attention as movie protests do now. Time moves on and the method for delivery of objectionable materials change. There will always be objectionable material out there, kids will seek it and they will usually succeed in finding it on the technology that their parents have the least familiarity with.
See, I'm not advocating a ban or anything, but...I have no respect for a company that deliberately tries to draw negative attention to the gaming industry just to increase thier publicity.
I also find it amusing that if you point out the possibility of kids playing the game, Rockstar will insist that it's a game for adults only, but they will vigorously fight against an AO rating. Just let it get the AO rating; people who want it will buy it. Oh wait, then you won't get as much publicity as GameStop won't carry it
They're doing a great job of it and the industry certainly doesn't need it because of their antics. I agree wholeheartedly.
I also find it amusing that if you point out the possibility of kids playing the game, Rockstar will insist that it's a game for adults only, but they will vigorously fight against an AO rating. Just let it get the AO rating; people who want it will buy it. Oh wait, then you won't get as much publicity as GameStop won't carry it
Absolutely, again - the BS that they pull and come up with...I'm just tired of it. It's like "we're going to push the envelope and throw as much questionable material in the game that we can, but as soon as you catch us on it, we're going to act like we're innocent victims and just acting on the true desires of the gaming public". And then Jack Thompson comes out of his hole and starts another tirade of insults and threats and more mock data about how game violence correlates with real life violence and the dog-and-pony show starts up again between these two.
Seriously...I wish Thompson would just finally have enough and decide to go on a kamikaze mission with a bunch of TNT strapped to his chest and run straight into the lobby of Rockstar HQ and take himself + Rockstar out. I'm not advocating violence in itself but seriously I'm sick of hearing about either of the two. Go away already. Gaming doesn't need your BS.
As much as I (and many others) rag on EA for some of the crap they do, at least they do still let developers make their games after they buy them out (Burnout, Time Splitters) and really, stuff like this (Rockstar/Take Two vs Jack Thompson) makes me somewhat appreciate EA for not going that far off the deep end themselves.
I also find it amusing that if you point out the possibility of kids playing the game, Rockstar will insist that it's a game for adults only, but they will vigorously fight against an AO rating. Just let it get the AO rating; people who want it will buy it. Oh wait, then you won't get as much publicity as GameStop won't carry it
But Sony and Nintendo won't put out AO games, this making the rating useless except for online PC games.
...Microsoft either.
None of 'the big three' (console makers) will allow AO titles.
Truthfully I think the only reason they won't is, well...Nintendo won't, that's a given. They want to shed the "kiddie" image and I don't really think they HAVE a "kiddie" image per se, but Nintendo's out of the question. Microsoft and Sony - I don't think they'd allow an AO just because they don't want to be the first one to do it. If there was another console that did it first, then I think they'd be more willing, but I don't think they want to be that "ground breaker" in that regard.
I still don't see what the big fuss is about. I know 3rd parties generally perceive AO as alienating their prospective buyers, but if a game had an AO rating for a justified reason (other than being just blatantly subjective...in other words - if the content was justified and had a reason to be there) it wouldn't keep me from buying the game, personally, just because it had the AO rating.
Yes, but most stores don't stock AO.
It's similar to the difference between R and NC-17.