-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
New Maddox. The recent GTA debacle
- Thread starter Eminem
- Start date
Leatherface
Member
Priceless. :lol
Prince of Space
Banned
Too fucking right. :lol
Unfortunately it misses the point entirely.
Yes, the "hot coffee" content is nothing on top of the rest of the game. Great, yay.
The problem is with the way the ESRB rates games. It allows developers to hide content that may otherwise up the rating of the game. This apparent weakness could be what leads to the federal regulation of video games.
So ya, the R*/GTA thing isn't a big deal in terms of content, but it could mean a lot for the future of self-regulation by the industry. The appearance of the inability to rate one's own product is the last thing the industry needs.
Yes, the "hot coffee" content is nothing on top of the rest of the game. Great, yay.
The problem is with the way the ESRB rates games. It allows developers to hide content that may otherwise up the rating of the game. This apparent weakness could be what leads to the federal regulation of video games.
So ya, the R*/GTA thing isn't a big deal in terms of content, but it could mean a lot for the future of self-regulation by the industry. The appearance of the inability to rate one's own product is the last thing the industry needs.
Leatherface
Member
Matlock said:
yeah, he should take notes on teh funny from you, am i rite?! =P
fugimax said:
Bull-fucking-shit
People trying to find reasons to hate or downplay Rockstar are just moronic at times. If you buy the game AND DON'T MOD IT or DON'T USE SOME SECRET CODES THAT REQUIRE A THIRD PARTY DEVICE, you can access the left-over code. What's more pathetic, is that, for the console versions at least, the people who were 17 when they bought the game last year are already 18. ESBR is just pissed off and i'm sure they don't even understand what's happening, they're just trying to prove a point.
I'm tired of typing up my views/argument...so I posted it here
The point isn't the small deliniation in rating. While the ESRB's descriptions are very very similar, as you can see from retailer reaction, "AO" carries quite a bit of weight.
The point is the ESRB can easily be duped when it comes to rating a game. He doesn't address that.
fugimax said:
Despite what numerous Chicken Littles like to claim, this will never happen unless the First Amendment is repealed.
The ESRB is useless as it currently operates, yes, but the only repercussions are political stunting and excess correspondence from Jack Thompson.
carbonbased
Member
Perfectly executed.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
Eh. I'm apathetic about this article as much as the controversy itself.
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
Yusaku said:
Deny. Its some stupid rivalry that consists of people who have too much time on their hands. Maddox has fallen off compared to his first three or four years of material but its still good. Although in the past couple years, its more posts about issues instead of randomly picking out what sucks.
That Maddox needs to come back.
Littleberu
Banned
I'M 17, I SHOULDN'T WATCH PEOPLE MAKING LOVE!!!.
That was funny, but I don't agree (he's obviously sarcastic).
It doesn't matter that the difference is so small, from at least 17 years old to at least 18 years old. Those are details. Those ESRB guys rate this stuff by the content, the content in the game was hidden. So, it's just coincedence that GTA is a game for at least 17 year olds, but what if this was Hello Kitty instead of GTA. It wouldn't be any different. Content in the game would be hidden and that content would classed differently than the content that is not hidden. Whether that difference is great or little, it is a difference, and that's a problem. In GTA:SA, the difference just happens to be slight.
But anyway, I think stuff that contains violence should be, like, at least 16 years or something. And sexual stuff at least 12 years. There's just nothing wrong with sex, imo. All these ratings suck big fat monkey balls.
It doesn't matter that the difference is so small, from at least 17 years old to at least 18 years old. Those are details. Those ESRB guys rate this stuff by the content, the content in the game was hidden. So, it's just coincedence that GTA is a game for at least 17 year olds, but what if this was Hello Kitty instead of GTA. It wouldn't be any different. Content in the game would be hidden and that content would classed differently than the content that is not hidden. Whether that difference is great or little, it is a difference, and that's a problem. In GTA:SA, the difference just happens to be slight.
But anyway, I think stuff that contains violence should be, like, at least 16 years or something. And sexual stuff at least 12 years. There's just nothing wrong with sex, imo. All these ratings suck big fat monkey balls.
krypt0nian
Banned
Brilliant!