Take-Two forks out the cash

Loki[D.d.G] · Post by **Loki[D.d.G]** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:51 am

[url="http://valleywag.gawker.com/5351062/grand-theft-autos-20-million-screw-up"]Grand Theft Auto's $20 Million Screw Up[/url]

Remember the hidden sex scene in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas? It was a terrible, amoral departure from the game's official content of endless murder rampages. And it's going to cost publisher Take-Two Interactive an astonishing $20 million.

The company and, more to the point, its insurance company are shelling out the money to settle a lawsuit from investors who claimed the company knew its programmers had hidden the sex scene in the game and decided to ship it anyway. Not a terrible idea; development is expensive, timetables are tight, and in any case the hidden scenes could only be unlocked with special software. But the company underestimated how strong America's Puritan impulses remain. Now it's spending 36 times what CBS was (unsuccessfully) fined for the crime of exposing America to Janet Jackson's nipple. It's just that inappropriate to take a break from your life of crime, for sex.

This is just plain silly. 20 million for hiding a sex scene in a game that is already as "M" rated as is logically possible?

Fljotsdale · Post by **Fljotsdale** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:14 pm

Loki[D.d.G] wrote:[url="http://valleywag.gawker.com/5351062/grand-theft-autos-20-million-screw-up"]Grand Theft Auto's $20 Million Screw Up[/url]

Remember the hidden sex scene in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas? It was a terrible, amoral departure from the game's official content of endless murder rampages. And it's going to cost publisher Take-Two Interactive an astonishing $20 million.

The company and, more to the point, its insurance company are shelling out the money to settle a lawsuit from investors who claimed the company knew its programmers had hidden the sex scene in the game and decided to ship it anyway. Not a terrible idea; development is expensive, timetables are tight, and in any case the hidden scenes could only be unlocked with special software. But the company underestimated how strong America's Puritan impulses remain. Now it's spending 36 times what CBS was (unsuccessfully) fined for the crime of exposing America to Janet Jackson's nipple. It's just that inappropriate to take a break from your life of crime, for sex.

This is just plain silly. 20 million for hiding a sex scene in a game that is already as "M" rated as is logically possible?

WHAT!!!! Janet Jackson's nipple? Ye gods... with the top shelves of magazine purveyers chock full of porn, what the hell does a nipple or a hidden sex scene matter? Let the puritans scream about the easily accessible porn before such trivialities as those...

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:53 pm

The utterly illogical moral "priorities" on this continent will never cease to astound me...
It's quite acceptable to splatter gore, blood, and guts into chunks across a monitor or TV screen... murder and maim 1000s of different ways... BUT woe betide anyone who has the temerity to introduce something that should be regarded as natural and beautiful -- sex and the human body --

Siberys · Post by **Siberys** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:01 pm

It's just that inappropriate to take a break from your life of crime, for sex.

And it only gets worse.

GTA: San Andreas, The Ballad of Gay Tony just came out, and no I did not purposely add the word "gay" to that title.

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:07 pm

dragon wench wrote:The utterly illogical moral "priorities" on this continent will never cease to astound me...
It's quite acceptable to splatter gore, blood, and guts into chunks across a monitor or TV screen... murder and maim 1000s of different ways... BUT woe betide anyone who has the temerity to introduce something that should be regarded as natural and beautiful -- sex and the human body --

Yeah, pretty much. Sex is evil, watching/creating violence is good. Humanity is in need of a sharp smack to the back of its collective head, I think.

Loki[D.d.G] · Post by **Loki[D.d.G]** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:52 pm

fable wrote:Yeah, pretty much. Sex is evil, watching/creating violence is good.

How else would they justify war?

endboss · Post by **endboss** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:48 pm

I don't know what to think about this. On one hand, it's obviously a bad thing, morally (sex = bad; violence = good), artistically, and in regards to our freedoms. On the other hand, GTA has a disgusting influence on the video game industry. Games have been watered down into a muddled mess of different genres, minigames, and cutscenes. Going on rampages and unlocking achievements, usually by collecting random objects, is now not just a simple distraction, but the core of gameplay. It has done to the most damage to the reputation of the industry and the intelligence of the younger crowd (now collectively diagnosed with ADD). And because of all this it's nice to see Rockstar pay.

fable wrote:Yeah, pretty much. Sex is evil, watching/creating violence is good. Humanity is in need of a sharp smack to the back of its collective head, I think.

It's not humanity, it's nature. The human population has grown to an unbelievable size. While we obviously have not yet hit the carrying capacity for this planet (a CC that covers the entire planet! astounding), the doubling time for the entire population is within a lifetime. Between 1950 and 1990, the world population went from 2.5 billion to over 5 billion. Population could reach an upwards of 12 billion before the end of the 21st century. Nature's traditional mechanisms for coping with this problem do not apply to us as we harness the environment and utilize complex medicines, so perhaps the new regulating techniques are psychological. We glamorize war and frown on sex. That's a sure fire way to lower the population. Of course, that's not the case everywhere, but America continues to have an increasing impact on European values.

Either that or we're just run by crazies.

Loki[D.d.G] · Post by **Loki[D.d.G]** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:15 pm

On the other hand, GTA has a disgusting influence on the video game industry. Games have been watered down into a muddled mess of different genres, minigames, and cutscenes. Going on rampages and unlocking achievements, usually by collecting random objects, is now not just a simple distraction, but the core of gameplay.

Being a fan of the GTA series, I feel I should point out that Take-Two has managed to create a much more interactive world/environment when compared to most games in the market. And the "muddled mess of different genres, minigames, and cutscenes" does actually make the game very fun to play. Seeing as there is no set goal, if you so choose, and you can do what you please, it leaves the game world open to your own interpretation.

Of course when we start talking missions, that inevitably leads you back down the sex, guns and booze alley. But then again, no one said you have to do the missions to enjoy the game now, did they?

endboss · Post by **endboss** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:44 pm

Loki[D.d.G] wrote:Being a fan of the GTA series, I feel I should point out that Take-Two has managed to create a much more interactive world/environment when compared to most games in the market. And the "muddled mess of different genres, minigames, and cutscenes" does actually make the game very fun to play. Seeing as there is no set goal, if you so choose, and you can do what you please, it leaves the game world open to your own interpretation.

Of course when we start talking missions, that inevitably leads you back down the sex, guns and booze alley. But then again, no one said you have to do the missions to enjoy the game now, did they?

The only GTA game I can speak on with some authority is San Andreas. I've played them all, but the only one I actually completed and really dug deep into was SA. I obviously enjoyed it because I wouldn't have been able to sit long through a game I didn't enjoy (GTA3, VC, GTA4). The minigames, the cutscenes (especially when you get beat up, raped, treated like an idiot, and such, despite having all this skill and firepower... you know, the almost criminal gameplay/story separation), the infusing of RPG elements, and so on were parts that really hurt the game in my eyes.

It certainly was not an interactive environment. Sure, you could kill any random pedestrian you wanted to and drive any vehicle, but that's it. Your actions had no impact on the story (unless you were doing exactly what the story said you should do in the exact way it said you should do it). Going on a crime spree didn't mean anything (especially odd considering the very basis of the story and how the game characterized CJ in the story). You couldn't enter buildings that weren't part of missions. Terrorizing a city block didn't mean more cops or more gang members patrolled there.

Sure, you don't have to do the missions. You only have to do them if you want to get out of Los Santos and unlock the other 2/3 of the world.

SA was fun, and had high production values, but IMO wasn't particularly well made or well thought out. I enjoyed it, but would I play it again or consider purchasing another GTA? Nah. Another lasting legacy is the whole idea of adding gimmicks and not really improving the core gameplay or the world for the sequel. GTA's popularity means this is a very viable route to take for development. SA is basically the same thing as the previous 2 games, and GTA4 doesn't do anything different besides add in an annoying manual cell phone (CJ's cell was the best), forced dates, wonky physics, and muddling the color pallet. Is the world more interactive? No. Is it bigger? No. Is it more varied? Hell no.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:01 pm

Please, won't SOMEBODY think of the CHILDREN!

I am shocked people, shocked! A sex scene in the paragon of moral virtue that is otherwise GTA is just unacceptable! Who could forget such memorable GTA gaming moments as going around handing out candy to starving orphans, or when CJ realises he's made a mistake on his tax return and has to race against the clock to correct it before it before it gets processed? Now, however, the purity of my GTA gaming experience has been sullied beyond recovery - never again shall my son and I sit down and enjoy a spiritually uplifting session of GTA, lest his fragile mind be corrupted beyond repair (see attachment).

Fer cryin' out loud, this is just stupid on so many levels...

In New York, a class action lawsuit was filed by Florence Cohen, an 85-year-old grandmother who purchased the game for her 14-year-old grandson (according to the old rating of M, the game is typically considered inappropriate for this age). Cohen's lawsuit claimed that Rockstar Games and Take-Two Interactive, the publisher of the game, are guilty of deception, false advertising, fraud and abuse. The accusation of deception is based on the change from M-rated to AO, meaning according to the lawsuit that the original rating was a deceptive practice.

(Thanks wikipedia...)It's not like they ever try to sell GTA as kiddy-friendly, it's clearly rated as 'Mature-only', meaning don't buy it for your 14-year old grandson. The code was blocked and required special 3rd-party mods to access. And surely if the original rating was deception that'd be something to take up with the ESRB, not the publishers?
More to the point, when was it decided that sex is a bad thing, and can we get a recount 'cos I didn't get to cast a vote and I really disagree with the current take.

Loki[D.d.G] · Post by **Loki[D.d.G]** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:45 pm

@endboss,
Well, we obviously have very differing opinions about the GTA series, so I think debating them would be a waste of time. I'll leave it at that.

@Odie,
LOL nice find.

endboss · Post by **endboss** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 10:29 pm

Ode to a Grasshopper wrote:Fer cryin' out loud, this is just stupid on so many levels...(Thanks wikipedia...)It's not like they ever try to sell GTA as kiddy-friendly, it's clearly rated as 'Mature-only', meaning don't buy it for your 14-year old grandson. The code was blocked and required special 3rd-party mods to access. And surely if the original rating was deception that'd be something to take up with the ESRB, not the publishers?
More to the point, when was it decided that sex is a bad thing, and can we get a recount 'cos I didn't get to cast a vote and I really disagree with the current take.

Welcome to the American legal system!

The attached picture is priceless