July 14, 2005 5:30 AM PDT

Clinton wants inquiry into 'Grand Theft' sex

In a letter to FTC, senator expresses concern over reports that anyone can unlock sexually graphic images hidden inside game.
The New York Times

The story "Clinton wants inquiry into 'Grand Theft' sex" published July 14, 2005 at 5:30 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.

But is it 'sex'? Depends on what your definition of 'is' is.
Firstly, I've seen the silly hot coffee bit. There is no *****. No *****! It's modestly amusing in the way that Lara Croft's pointy, unrealistic breasts were amusing in Tomb Raider I. That is to say, anyone but the most lame dork would be interested.
Secondly- this patch was an unsolicited and unsupported patch to the game. If Rockstar Games created this code and they decided not to include it it's within their rights. It was not released in the final, and there's no way to stumble on to it unless you're really in need of excitement. It 's about as sensible to bring charges against them as it would be to sue Intel for overclocking your CPU and having it catch fire.
Thirdly- The content of sex, compared to the rest of the game is miniscule. It is far more violent than it intends to be sexual. This recalls the South Park episode where (spoiler!) everyone gets up in arms when "Butters" gets a sharp object in his eye, but everyone acutally is fretted by a "wardrobe malfunction". Hilary Clinton needs to stop being a weak minded centrist pandering to religious freaks- if they bought their kid this game, it's their fault.
Finally- There's no *****!!
Posted by veccio1 (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
But is it 'sex'? Depends on what your definition of 'is' is.
Firstly, I've seen the silly hot coffee bit. There is no *****. No *****! It's modestly amusing in the way that Lara Croft's pointy, unrealistic breasts were amusing in Tomb Raider I. That is to say, anyone but the most lame dork would be interested.
Secondly- this patch was an unsolicited and unsupported patch to the game. If Rockstar Games created this code and they decided not to include it it's within their rights. It was not released in the final, and there's no way to stumble on to it unless you're really in need of excitement. It 's about as sensible to bring charges against them as it would be to sue Intel for overclocking your CPU and having it catch fire.
Thirdly- The content of sex, compared to the rest of the game is miniscule. It is far more violent than it intends to be sexual. This recalls the South Park episode where (spoiler!) everyone gets up in arms when "Butters" gets a sharp object in his eye, but everyone acutally is fretted by a "wardrobe malfunction". Hilary Clinton needs to stop being a weak minded centrist pandering to religious freaks- if they bought their kid this game, it's their fault.
Finally- There's no *****!!
Posted by veccio1 (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Don't vote for this uber-b^@tch
For some reason lately she has been all-over the place in search for publicity.
She is oportunistic, and this is just another way for her to look like "tough" and protecting families and little children from sex/violence.

Whatever. I am tired of hearing from this dumb congres-people (Liberman comes to mind) complaining about sex and violence in videogames. These guys never played a game, and probably imagine the typical gamer as a 14 years old boy.
Not, so, average gamer is 28-29, and adult enough to know what to play or what not.

Just turn on your TV and see what kind of violence/sex is there. Much worse (especially on cable).

My 2 cents: Don't vote for these people, who want to curtail your freedom on what can you play.
(No, I am not republican)
Posted by albatros246 (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Don't vote for this uber-b^@tch
For some reason lately she has been all-over the place in search for publicity.
She is oportunistic, and this is just another way for her to look like "tough" and protecting families and little children from sex/violence.

Whatever. I am tired of hearing from this dumb congres-people (Liberman comes to mind) complaining about sex and violence in videogames. These guys never played a game, and probably imagine the typical gamer as a 14 years old boy.
Not, so, average gamer is 28-29, and adult enough to know what to play or what not.

Just turn on your TV and see what kind of violence/sex is there. Much worse (especially on cable).

My 2 cents: Don't vote for these people, who want to curtail your freedom on what can you play.
(No, I am not republican)
Posted by albatros246 (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Umm... What did you expect?
Knowing the history of these titles (they have been controvesial since GTA 1) What did you think you where buying for your kids? Rockstar just expanded on the GTA series which has included explicit content (strip clubs, prostitutes, porn stars) since version III. This is nothing new, and if you let your kids buy this stuff then shame on you... I am a firm believer that parents need to monitor thier children. Its not Rockstar's or the ESRB,s responsibility to parent your children, its your responsibility. By the way The sex with girlfriends (sounds and implications, no visuals)are part of the actual game, not a hacker patch. The hacker patch shows nudity where it wasn't before. I love these politicians who claim to be experts on certain games and have never played the game, but only relay what they have been told about it. Where was Hillary when the hackers turned the beach in the DOA Volleyball game for Xbox into a nudist colony with a downloadable patch? Where was Hillary when Dave Mira BMX XXX came out WITH NUDITY ALREADY INCLUDED!!???!!! Guess the politicians missed that one! GTA is a bad game that should not be sold to minors, but sticking MORE labels on it saying it is bad or sensoring the video game publishers for making it isn't going to fix anything. You know what will? Parents- start parenting your kids, and maybe you should monitor what they play and watch, so that those types of games, movies and other questionable media don't get into your kids hands. That is your job as a parent. You are responsible for them, and not anybody else.
Posted by vbluguitar (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Umm... What did you expect?
Knowing the history of these titles (they have been controvesial since GTA 1) What did you think you where buying for your kids? Rockstar just expanded on the GTA series which has included explicit content (strip clubs, prostitutes, porn stars) since version III. This is nothing new, and if you let your kids buy this stuff then shame on you... I am a firm believer that parents need to monitor thier children. Its not Rockstar's or the ESRB,s responsibility to parent your children, its your responsibility. By the way The sex with girlfriends (sounds and implications, no visuals)are part of the actual game, not a hacker patch. The hacker patch shows nudity where it wasn't before. I love these politicians who claim to be experts on certain games and have never played the game, but only relay what they have been told about it. Where was Hillary when the hackers turned the beach in the DOA Volleyball game for Xbox into a nudist colony with a downloadable patch? Where was Hillary when Dave Mira BMX XXX came out WITH NUDITY ALREADY INCLUDED!!???!!! Guess the politicians missed that one! GTA is a bad game that should not be sold to minors, but sticking MORE labels on it saying it is bad or sensoring the video game publishers for making it isn't going to fix anything. You know what will? Parents- start parenting your kids, and maybe you should monitor what they play and watch, so that those types of games, movies and other questionable media don't get into your kids hands. That is your job as a parent. You are responsible for them, and not anybody else.
Posted by vbluguitar (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This is getting out of hand...
You think these politicans would have better things to do. This is a mod to the game. It's not part of the shipping product. The user needs to download the mod and install it in order to get these scenes. They don't realize that the more they talk about this, the more kids will want it.
Posted by DustoMan (77 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This is getting out of hand...
You think these politicans would have better things to do. This is a mod to the game. It's not part of the shipping product. The user needs to download the mod and install it in order to get these scenes. They don't realize that the more they talk about this, the more kids will want it.
Posted by DustoMan (77 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Husbands sexcapades could be a worse
game! She is a hypocrite, and now I will never vote for a
censorship candidate. What ever happened to freedom of
expression? Why talk about kids always/adults buy these
games, and play them also.

GET OUT OF MY LIFE AND QUIT TELLING ME WHAT IS
WRONG OR RIGHT.

Start at your own marriage, loser Hillary Rotten.
Posted by (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Husbands sexcapades could be a worse
game! She is a hypocrite, and now I will never vote for a
censorship candidate. What ever happened to freedom of
expression? Why talk about kids always/adults buy these
games, and play them also.

GET OUT OF MY LIFE AND QUIT TELLING ME WHAT IS
WRONG OR RIGHT.

Start at your own marriage, loser Hillary Rotten.
Posted by (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Like everyone else
You have to be 18 or older to buy this game in the first place. It
has extreme violence, and in some cases the objective of the
mission is to kill cops. You can buy porn in most states starting
at age 18. So, what is the big deal if over 18 year olds are
watching porn in a video game, let alone had to hack it in by
adding some software to the mix to do it. Some people just
need to stop saying, "What about the children?", because
children should not be playing this game in the first place. Every
one that says to look into this matter, needs to go fsck()
themself.
Posted by (43 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Like everyone else
You have to be 18 or older to buy this game in the first place. It
has extreme violence, and in some cases the objective of the
mission is to kill cops. You can buy porn in most states starting
at age 18. So, what is the big deal if over 18 year olds are
watching porn in a video game, let alone had to hack it in by
adding some software to the mix to do it. Some people just
need to stop saying, "What about the children?", because
children should not be playing this game in the first place. Every
one that says to look into this matter, needs to go fsck()
themself.
Posted by (43 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Stupid people?
Its silly really.

The game is called "Grand Theft Auto" not "Fuzzy Bunny and Friends". If a game is named after a crime, then it doesnt take an genius to realize its probably not for children.

Your child asks to go to a friends house to play grand theft auto.. alarm bells should sound in your head.

Your child wants you to buy it, alarm bells should sound as soon as you hear the title.

Your child buys it without your permission, you see him playing a game, ask him what it is, he says Grand Theft Auto. Do you walk away and go "Ah must be an educational game". No.

Parents dont want to take responsibility for monitoring their children so demand that the government do it for them.

Unless these parents are extremely stupid, they dont need the government to watch their children for them and chip away at the first amendment so you can continue to ignore your child and still ensure that your child cant possibly be exposed to something that could possibly offend anyone.

If your that loathe to raise your children, then do them a favor and have childrens services come pick them up immediately.
Posted by Fray9 (547 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Stupid people?
Its silly really.

The game is called "Grand Theft Auto" not "Fuzzy Bunny and Friends". If a game is named after a crime, then it doesnt take an genius to realize its probably not for children.

Your child asks to go to a friends house to play grand theft auto.. alarm bells should sound in your head.

Your child wants you to buy it, alarm bells should sound as soon as you hear the title.

Your child buys it without your permission, you see him playing a game, ask him what it is, he says Grand Theft Auto. Do you walk away and go "Ah must be an educational game". No.

Parents dont want to take responsibility for monitoring their children so demand that the government do it for them.

Unless these parents are extremely stupid, they dont need the government to watch their children for them and chip away at the first amendment so you can continue to ignore your child and still ensure that your child cant possibly be exposed to something that could possibly offend anyone.

If your that loathe to raise your children, then do them a favor and have childrens services come pick them up immediately.
Posted by Fray9 (547 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Get Real....What is the definition of "IS?"
The folks of GTA need to respond to this inquiry with the same stupid question her husband had...what is the definition of "is?"

Maybe if you move the atmosphere to the White House and after the supposed scandalous sex, we could have a little ***** stain appear on the sex partner's clothing, then the senator would not be so "offended."

If the "honorable senator from New York" wants to do something worthwhile, let her initiate a bill that would only allow presidents who serve the full 8 years collect 50% of their salary. It is good enough that the military can only retain half their military pay after serving 20 years.....how does a lousy president who only does 8 years get to retain 100% of their pay? Does that sound fair....

The president has a whole company of people willing to take a bullet if someone shoots at him...the military has to take the bullet all by themselves and then pay for the medical benefits they will need after taking the bullet....

Come on...do something worthwhile....censorship in spite of all your husband has done is quite hypocritical.
Posted by IleyP (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Get Real....What is the definition of "IS?"
The folks of GTA need to respond to this inquiry with the same stupid question her husband had...what is the definition of "is?"

Maybe if you move the atmosphere to the White House and after the supposed scandalous sex, we could have a little ***** stain appear on the sex partner's clothing, then the senator would not be so "offended."

If the "honorable senator from New York" wants to do something worthwhile, let her initiate a bill that would only allow presidents who serve the full 8 years collect 50% of their salary. It is good enough that the military can only retain half their military pay after serving 20 years.....how does a lousy president who only does 8 years get to retain 100% of their pay? Does that sound fair....

The president has a whole company of people willing to take a bullet if someone shoots at him...the military has to take the bullet all by themselves and then pay for the medical benefits they will need after taking the bullet....

Come on...do something worthwhile....censorship in spite of all your husband has done is quite hypocritical.
Posted by IleyP (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Blame "Hackers"
Blaming this on a rogue group of "hackers" is an incredibly deceptive ploy that is intended to sucker the technically ignorant majority.

"Hackers" - the unlocking program was created by one man, not a super secret group of malicious technophiles. This term is supposed to evoke fear; it is supposed to give us the fear of "THEM".

Second, this program does not _add_ the sexual content to the game. That content is already on the disc, but is simply inaccessible. Rockstar created the material, and then put a padlock over the door. This program simply removes the padlock.
Posted by (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Blame "Hackers"
Blaming this on a rogue group of "hackers" is an incredibly deceptive ploy that is intended to sucker the technically ignorant majority.

"Hackers" - the unlocking program was created by one man, not a super secret group of malicious technophiles. This term is supposed to evoke fear; it is supposed to give us the fear of "THEM".

Second, this program does not _add_ the sexual content to the game. That content is already on the disc, but is simply inaccessible. Rockstar created the material, and then put a padlock over the door. This program simply removes the padlock.
Posted by (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Sounds like someone is running for President
Sounds like she's already running for President. Gotta get some street cred with the 'family values' crowd before the primaries!
Posted by (402 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Sounds like someone is running for President
Sounds like she's already running for President. Gotta get some street cred with the 'family values' crowd before the primaries!
Posted by (402 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You just don't get it, H.R.C.....
As a modder myself, I can say things like this are always going to be an issue because some people are immature about sex and think it is funny to put that stuff in a game. So what?

Politicians need to stay out of our lives. The GTA game is rated. It says on the package that it contains sex and violence. What the politicians exhibit when they wade in on this issue is a COMPLETE lack of understanding about gaming, gamers and modding.

Let me put is simply so even politicians can understand:

Nearly every game is modifiable. Some game companies make it easier to do than others, but nearly all games can be patched or hacked.

The vast majority of mods are cool and not about sex or violence. Most of them are about adding new locations to the game (called maps), new weapons (called props) or hacks to make the game play easier or harder, such as increasing or decreasing the jump height of a player.

Because tools like Hammer, Quake, and Unreal used to create new maps are free and easy to use, making maps is the most common game mod. Making new character models requires higher end software like XSI, or Maya, Wavefront, and these programs cost THOUSANDS of dollars. The limited feature free-versions of these programs have restrictions on what they can do, and the learning curve on these programs is really steep. In short, it takes time and hard work to make a decent mod, and it isnt for the faint of heart. Even after a model is created in a 3d app like XSI, it takes some real work to get it ported to the game so the game engine will recognize it. And even after THAT is done, getting the mod in a format that can be shared is a task and a half. And all this is with the easiest kind of model to create, a static model. A player or game model that reacts to the game environment (or has AI) requires rigging* and code to make the model run, jump, talk or die. In addition, a version of the model FOR EACH OF THOSE ACTIONS, has to be made or more often, rigged, to perform the actions. In other words, you need to provide to the game engine a version of the model just standing there, another one of the model running, and another of the model crouching, falling, dying, whatever. In short, it takes WORK to make this stuff.

Because it takes so much effort to make these models, game makers sometimes remove content or story lines from a game by moving the camera or viewpoint of the game. In other words, the camera can be placed anywhere in a game, pretty much. It can follow a player, can look out the window of a vehicle, look over the shoulder of a player or model. As such, it is often easier to move the camera than to remove a model. If the camera cant see the model, the unwanted content is effectively hidden or unreachable.

Because once a model is rigged and in the game, it can be coded to do other things, it really hard to prevent a coder from making the rig do silly things like dance or simulate sexual positions. What keeps this from happening more often is that most gamers dont want to see that kind of lame stuff. Gamers want real content that adds to the game, not some lame patch that moves a models hips in a certain way. Peer pressure and review IS a big part of the mod community, and being a good modder is a badge of honor. Most modders who are any good wouldnt bother with something lame like adding sex to a game title.

Most of us are better than that.

EVEN IF a game like GTA contained sex scenes in it from Rockstar itself, it was LABELED as being for mature people. I guess politicians cant read.

Final points. It hasnt escaped me that these politicians and even the anti-video game groups say things like A web savvy kid can find this patch and download it to reveal the content. That makes me laugh, because a web savvy kid probably already has seen MUCH WORSE on the net. We are talking about full on, explicit hard core sex. No age check, no warnings. Again, the politicians miss the boat here, big time. Instead of worrying about a game mod like GTA Hot Coffee, a patch that doesnt even show genitals (according to some posters here), the politicians should be up in arms about online porn. But they arent freaking out because they dont really care. They know that the porn industry hides behind free speech claims, and politicians DONT want to injure ISP by making
them responsible for the porn available on networks. After all, many politicians, I would argue, own stock in ISP companies, so it would cost them money to blame ISPs or hold them responsible.

Frankly, gamers understand that A GAME IS A GAME. It is not advocating anything. It is a fictitious world were certain things happen, like being able to jump really high or run really fast, shoot really well, die a thousand times only to be respawned seconds later in another part of the map. It is a lark, not a not a how-to-guide and we gamers know the difference between reality and what happens in a game. Maybe if more politicians played video games, they would know the difference, too
Posted by (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You just don't get it, H.R.C.....
As a modder myself, I can say things like this are always going to be an issue because some people are immature about sex and think it is funny to put that stuff in a game. So what?

Politicians need to stay out of our lives. The GTA game is rated. It says on the package that it contains sex and violence. What the politicians exhibit when they wade in on this issue is a COMPLETE lack of understanding about gaming, gamers and modding.

Let me put is simply so even politicians can understand:

Nearly every game is modifiable. Some game companies make it easier to do than others, but nearly all games can be patched or hacked.

The vast majority of mods are cool and not about sex or violence. Most of them are about adding new locations to the game (called maps), new weapons (called props) or hacks to make the game play easier or harder, such as increasing or decreasing the jump height of a player.

Because tools like Hammer, Quake, and Unreal used to create new maps are free and easy to use, making maps is the most common game mod. Making new character models requires higher end software like XSI, or Maya, Wavefront, and these programs cost THOUSANDS of dollars. The limited feature free-versions of these programs have restrictions on what they can do, and the learning curve on these programs is really steep. In short, it takes time and hard work to make a decent mod, and it isnt for the faint of heart. Even after a model is created in a 3d app like XSI, it takes some real work to get it ported to the game so the game engine will recognize it. And even after THAT is done, getting the mod in a format that can be shared is a task and a half. And all this is with the easiest kind of model to create, a static model. A player or game model that reacts to the game environment (or has AI) requires rigging* and code to make the model run, jump, talk or die. In addition, a version of the model FOR EACH OF THOSE ACTIONS, has to be made or more often, rigged, to perform the actions. In other words, you need to provide to the game engine a version of the model just standing there, another one of the model running, and another of the model crouching, falling, dying, whatever. In short, it takes WORK to make this stuff.

Because it takes so much effort to make these models, game makers sometimes remove content or story lines from a game by moving the camera or viewpoint of the game. In other words, the camera can be placed anywhere in a game, pretty much. It can follow a player, can look out the window of a vehicle, look over the shoulder of a player or model. As such, it is often easier to move the camera than to remove a model. If the camera cant see the model, the unwanted content is effectively hidden or unreachable.

Because once a model is rigged and in the game, it can be coded to do other things, it really hard to prevent a coder from making the rig do silly things like dance or simulate sexual positions. What keeps this from happening more often is that most gamers dont want to see that kind of lame stuff. Gamers want real content that adds to the game, not some lame patch that moves a models hips in a certain way. Peer pressure and review IS a big part of the mod community, and being a good modder is a badge of honor. Most modders who are any good wouldnt bother with something lame like adding sex to a game title.

Most of us are better than that.

EVEN IF a game like GTA contained sex scenes in it from Rockstar itself, it was LABELED as being for mature people. I guess politicians cant read.

Final points. It hasnt escaped me that these politicians and even the anti-video game groups say things like A web savvy kid can find this patch and download it to reveal the content. That makes me laugh, because a web savvy kid probably already has seen MUCH WORSE on the net. We are talking about full on, explicit hard core sex. No age check, no warnings. Again, the politicians miss the boat here, big time. Instead of worrying about a game mod like GTA Hot Coffee, a patch that doesnt even show genitals (according to some posters here), the politicians should be up in arms about online porn. But they arent freaking out because they dont really care. They know that the porn industry hides behind free speech claims, and politicians DONT want to injure ISP by making
them responsible for the porn available on networks. After all, many politicians, I would argue, own stock in ISP companies, so it would cost them money to blame ISPs or hold them responsible.

Frankly, gamers understand that A GAME IS A GAME. It is not advocating anything. It is a fictitious world were certain things happen, like being able to jump really high or run really fast, shoot really well, die a thousand times only to be respawned seconds later in another part of the map. It is a lark, not a not a how-to-guide and we gamers know the difference between reality and what happens in a game. Maybe if more politicians played video games, they would know the difference, too
Posted by (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
When are people going to get this....
I do not want to rant and rave about this. Truthfully, I dont want to waste my breath. In America, we have a great freedom that enables every single one of us to have an opinion and be heard with that opinion. With that said, who the hell is Hillary Clinton to tell ANYBODY else what is right or wrong? Who the hell is Joe Leiberman to say that a video game is too violent for me to play? I am 23, I understand that these laws (unless there was a blanket ban, not age restricted) would not effect me but I can imagine the unintuitive games that would result from such laws. Little Johnny's parents work long hard hours and don't notice that there is an explosive anger burning and building inside of him from being tormented at school. Little Johnny asks his unknowing parents to buy him GTA and they do so in feeling bad for not being there for him. Little Johnny snaps one day, shoots students, flees in a cop car and blames it on GTA. If Hillary has her way, Rockstar would go down for that. I grew up playing video games. I can vividly remember when i got Mortal Kombat(which I remember Joe Leiberman trying to get that game banned way back then) for the Sega Genesis. I remember spending late night hours playing Doom, Wolfenstein3d, Duke Nukem3d, and Blood. The GTA series is one of my favorite video games series to date. Did I grow up to weild rocket launchers blasting demons back to hell or steal someones car, get a hooker in that car, beat her down after im done with her for my money back, and then run her over? Much as Ms. Clinton would like you to beleive i did, unfortunatly, i didnt. I turned out to be a 23 year old about to finish my bachelors degree and in a good sales position. How could this happen, you might say?!?! Actually, its pretty simple. My parents, even through a divorce, were there for me, raised me with good morals and values (and im not even religious), taught me responsibility, and most importantly, LET ME MAKE MY OWN DECISIONS/MISTAKES.

Companies such as Rockstar do not have any obligations, thank god, to make games that do not have questionable assets. That is what the ESRB is for. "Well, who actually uses that?" you might say....truthfully, probably very few people, but, that IS NOT Rockstar's fault, that is the parents fault.

I can understand where a parent would be coming from in thinking "why should any child play a game like this? There is no need from someone to play a game like this. Why would anyone want to be exposed to such filth?" Well, heres the problem. The first question posed is simply a question that is based off of what you feel is morally right or wrong. The keyword in that sentence is YOU, Y-O-U. To the second question, again the answer can be paraphrased to the following. For some people, playing out roles of the "bad guy" in a video game can be alot of fun. I'm not gonna lie, I do enjoy that feeling alot when I get a headshot in counterstrike, drop a massive artillery strike on opposing soldiers in battlefield 2 and watch the Havok physics engine throw their bodies around like a ragdoll, and drive a stolen car down the sidewalk in GTA running over as many pedestrians as I can. When I shutdown the game, reality is back, no more killing people. I enjoy it, you do not. Get ready, here comes the catching end of paragraph: IF YOU DO NOT LIKE/CONDONE/APPROVE OF GRAND THEFT AUTO, DO NOT LET YOUR CHILDREN PLAY IT.

In reality, whether you think GTA is a horrific game or not, whether it should be banned from existence or mass produced and given to every kid on their 18th birthday, whichever side of the spectrum you lie on, you have to admit this....It is the parents job to guide and raise their own children, not Hillary Clintons or Joe Leiberman.

Whew! I ended up ranting.
Posted by (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
When are people going to get this....
I do not want to rant and rave about this. Truthfully, I dont want to waste my breath. In America, we have a great freedom that enables every single one of us to have an opinion and be heard with that opinion. With that said, who the hell is Hillary Clinton to tell ANYBODY else what is right or wrong? Who the hell is Joe Leiberman to say that a video game is too violent for me to play? I am 23, I understand that these laws (unless there was a blanket ban, not age restricted) would not effect me but I can imagine the unintuitive games that would result from such laws. Little Johnny's parents work long hard hours and don't notice that there is an explosive anger burning and building inside of him from being tormented at school. Little Johnny asks his unknowing parents to buy him GTA and they do so in feeling bad for not being there for him. Little Johnny snaps one day, shoots students, flees in a cop car and blames it on GTA. If Hillary has her way, Rockstar would go down for that. I grew up playing video games. I can vividly remember when i got Mortal Kombat(which I remember Joe Leiberman trying to get that game banned way back then) for the Sega Genesis. I remember spending late night hours playing Doom, Wolfenstein3d, Duke Nukem3d, and Blood. The GTA series is one of my favorite video games series to date. Did I grow up to weild rocket launchers blasting demons back to hell or steal someones car, get a hooker in that car, beat her down after im done with her for my money back, and then run her over? Much as Ms. Clinton would like you to beleive i did, unfortunatly, i didnt. I turned out to be a 23 year old about to finish my bachelors degree and in a good sales position. How could this happen, you might say?!?! Actually, its pretty simple. My parents, even through a divorce, were there for me, raised me with good morals and values (and im not even religious), taught me responsibility, and most importantly, LET ME MAKE MY OWN DECISIONS/MISTAKES.

Companies such as Rockstar do not have any obligations, thank god, to make games that do not have questionable assets. That is what the ESRB is for. "Well, who actually uses that?" you might say....truthfully, probably very few people, but, that IS NOT Rockstar's fault, that is the parents fault.

I can understand where a parent would be coming from in thinking "why should any child play a game like this? There is no need from someone to play a game like this. Why would anyone want to be exposed to such filth?" Well, heres the problem. The first question posed is simply a question that is based off of what you feel is morally right or wrong. The keyword in that sentence is YOU, Y-O-U. To the second question, again the answer can be paraphrased to the following. For some people, playing out roles of the "bad guy" in a video game can be alot of fun. I'm not gonna lie, I do enjoy that feeling alot when I get a headshot in counterstrike, drop a massive artillery strike on opposing soldiers in battlefield 2 and watch the Havok physics engine throw their bodies around like a ragdoll, and drive a stolen car down the sidewalk in GTA running over as many pedestrians as I can. When I shutdown the game, reality is back, no more killing people. I enjoy it, you do not. Get ready, here comes the catching end of paragraph: IF YOU DO NOT LIKE/CONDONE/APPROVE OF GRAND THEFT AUTO, DO NOT LET YOUR CHILDREN PLAY IT.

In reality, whether you think GTA is a horrific game or not, whether it should be banned from existence or mass produced and given to every kid on their 18th birthday, whichever side of the spectrum you lie on, you have to admit this....It is the parents job to guide and raise their own children, not Hillary Clintons or Joe Leiberman.

Whew! I ended up ranting.
Posted by (7 comments )
Reply Link Flag
There are a lot of movies that are more graphic than San Andres
There are a lot of movies that are more graphic than San Andres. I thought liberals embraced "freedom of speach".
Posted by SNYP40A1 (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.