August 3, 2005 4:00 AM PDT

Perspective: The case against 'Grand Theft Auto'

See all Perspectives
The case against 'Grand Theft Auto'
For those of you who worry about the future of U.S. competitiveness, I give you "Prison Tycoon."

The game from ValuSoft teaches kids how to build and manage a private incarceration facility, one of the few growth industries in America that has yet to be offshored to India or Mexico.

"Begin with a low security prison and build it up to a maximum security facility for the world's most dangerous criminals," the game publisher says in a description on its Web site. "But beware! Too harsh a prison will create a dangerous environment and could spark prisoner riots. Too lenient an approach will result in rampant gang activity."

I wanted to go out and buy a copy for my daughter, then realized she doesn't know how to use a keyboard yet.

The game industry has been mired in controversy in the past few weeks with the news that a downloadable piece of code will unlock pornographic scenes--secret, until recently--in "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas."

Putting an "Adults Only" rating on a game is the kiss of death for sales.

Parents groups and a diverse array of politicians requested tighter controls on sales of video games, particularly to minors. Australia banned the game in question. Additionally, the Entertainment Software Rating Board can impose sanctions on Grand Theft Auto series publisher Rockstar Games for failing to disclose content. The organization, which puts the ratings on games, has no control over retailers who sell titles rated "Mature" or "Adults Only" to minors.

The game industry and fans, meanwhile, claimed that passing legislation to control the sale or content of game software would infringe the First Amendment right to free speech. Kids would get restricted titles anyway. They also argue that since the secret sex scenes required a download that Rockstar didn't invent, the company can't be blamed for the problems.

While both sides have taken their arguments to the extreme, I have to admit I side with the regulators. I would like to see a law that required that "Mature" and "Adults Only" games could be sold only to people over a certain age.

Why? It engenders a slight social stigma. One of the main complaints (from the gamers) is that adults really don't pay attention to the games kids are playing. Under a strict rule that would require an adult to buy the game, not just give a nagging 12-year-old permission to get it, they would study the package first. They'd also think, "Do I really want 'Shell Shock Nam '67' on my credit card?"

Shame on them
You won't hear this from someone in my profession much, but I'm sort of a fan of community shame. History shows it works. No, I don't think retailers who sell games to kids should get their eyes poked out and forced to wander the Earth as Oedipus was. But cities like Venice and Athens thrived because people knew each other's business intimately, and the snooping didn't turn the places into moralistic enclaves.

Venice and Athens thrived because people knew each other's business intimately, and the snooping didn't turn the places into moralistic enclaves.

If a retailer got a fine or two for selling inappropriate video games, eyebrows would go up. Granted, some kids would still get their hands on the software, but some kids also chew Skoal. Overall, sales and access to violent or inappropriate titles would likely decline.

Additionally, the fears of a crackdown on the right to free expression are vastly overblown. The First Amendment allows reasonable time, place and manner restrictions. Kids can't buy pornography, but the companies that make it seem to be thriving.

Some will argue that violent games are actually good for society. In a recent article, Steven Johnson, the author of "Everything Bad is Good for You," argues fatuously that a decline in carjacking could conceivably be tied to games like "Grand Theft Auto" because they let kids act out these fantasies.

This argument rests on the assumption that suburban teen lads, the principal buyers of game systems, constitute a collective power keg of violence defused by PlayStation2. To test the thesis, I asked my nephew about "Grand Theft Auto." His parents won't let him have it, but he claims he hasn't had the urge to pistol whip anyone either. (Although he did talk his sister into getting inside a garbage can, then rolled it down a hill, in the name of science.)

Interestingly enough, game publishers seem to understand the impact of public opinion on their business. Commentators to sites like Gamasutra point out that putting an "Adults Only" rating on a game is the kiss of death for sales.

I admit I'm not a huge fan of video games. Even as a kid I really couldn't get fired up about "Pac-Man." I also believe that they can suck up inordinate amounts of time and contribute to the obesity problem.

But I'm also very impressed with the creativity of the industry. Seriously. The vast majority of games are actually more interesting than critics allow. If anyone knows of any that let you run anachronistic scenarios--such as "What if the Aztecs had cars?"--let me know. And the titles--"Destroy All Humans," "Solar Boy Django," "Escape of Bipeds"--beat anything coming out of Hollywood. There's a certain level of weirdness that is very engaging.

"Grand Theft Auto," however, is not your Rubicon.

Biography
Michael Kanellos is editor at large at CNET News.com, where he covers hardware, research and development, start-ups and the tech industry overseas. He has worked as an attorney, travel writer and sidewalk hawker for a time share resort, among other occupations.

More Perspectives

30 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Ridiculous...
The game was already rated Mature (17+)...did making it AO (18+) really fix anything? These days most kids are having real sex by 16, so it is really a moot point.
I do tend to side with Take-Two, those scenes are not actually in the game. The game must be hacked to open them, therefore, they should not be held liable (I actually don't even believe that these sex scenes are a problem being that the game is about murdering and stealing anyway).
This is just a nice way for our lame politicians to make noise and get their names in the papers. Way overblown.
-Rick
Posted by rs1990 (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I Agree...Ridiculous
Games are a way for people to vent and do things they might not get to do in real life. Sex in a video game is nothing new and with the availability of hardcore porn with one click of the mouse...what is the big deal???
Posted by (1 comment )
Link Flag
The difference
The difference between the game ratings of M (17+) and AO (18+) is the same as that between the movie ratings of NC17 (17+) and X (18+) - the implications of the two ratings are the same.

I'll admit that I'm not completely informed on exactly where the code is, but here's where I draw the line: If the scenes were put in the game from the start, it's the author's fault for putting them there - period. If it's an add-on that merely takes advantage of GTA's ability to expand (like a DOOM 'WAD' file), then the author is probably blameless.
Posted by Jim Harmon (329 comments )
Link Flag
The REAL difference...
The REAL difference is that thousands of stores, that previously carried the game, have now REMOVED it from the shelves.

This was always the REAL goal of such "ratings systems".
Posted by Gayle-Edwards (30 comments )
Link Flag
If I had my druthers....
...I'd want sexually oriented games rather than violence oriented ones --especially with force feedback accessories available. Of course, that does surrender to the conclusion that there must be either one or the other or both. My G.I. Joe didn't have a Kung Fu Grip and wasn't anatomically correct. It didn't seem to make a difference at the time.
Posted by hardedge (98 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Age
This is a trivial question, and I really dont know why It was released in the US below the age of Adult. It contains a whole manner racist, remarks. It belittles women. In the Uk and Ireland, it was released with an adult rating, and broke box office records. Yes, yes I hear the more pessimistic of you cry, some parents probably did buy it for their children, but then they have no comeback as the 18 rating on the front of the box, well, you would have to be IQ challenged to miss it... or would you?
Posted by (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
RE: The case against 'Grand Theft Auto'
How will any law prevent a parent from buying the game for the 12 or 13 yr old child?

If we are going to start targeting the stores that sell the games, Then we should also target the parents who buy the games for the children.

Jon
Posted by (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Say NO to legislation
The government really needs to stay out of this. What really needs to be fixed is a culture where a grandmother thinks it's okay to buy her 14-yr old grandson a $50 M-Rated game. I mean come on. Kids 10-15 are not so loaded money that they can buy these games on their own. The money is coming from somewhere and that's the irresponsible parents.
Posted by DustoMan (77 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Can't fix stupidity
Sorry to tell you this but you can't fix stupidity. As for that Grandmother, I hope Rockstar counter-sues and see how she likes it. If the govt is so itchy to pass new laws they should pass laws that penalize stupid lawsuits.
Posted by Laserdisc (79 comments )
Link Flag
Hear, hear!!!
While I think it's a good idea to have some obvious sort of controls preventing inappropriate content into the hands of minors, I agree with your comment - it's about responsible parenting. Parents screamed for TV ratings and got them, then the V-chip and got that. And yet we still have these uproars. Just how much legislation needs to be passed for parents to start doing their jobs anyway (and not just buy something because little Billy wants it)?
Posted by truegenius (33 comments )
Link Flag
This scene is excessively dangerous
But then, so is the whole damn game. What moron would buy this for their kids? Ugh!

What would the govt. getting involved in the sales of video games help? Really. I am asking this to define the argument. Could it make a difference?

And, on the other hand... Do we really believe that bit of gameplay was never meant to be seen? C'mon. 1-It was complete. We've all played the Mario hidden world where you go down the pipe and die because the world was incomplete, or the 'hidden levels' of other games. If they are there for developers only, usually they aren't so well done. I mean, this is a mini-game. Period. 2-Would it shock us so much if a game publisher actually used uncommon viral mkting techniques to sell games? See Ourcolony, Ilovebees, and the latest xbox 360 technique with the teen taking pics of himself w/a borrowed 360 raving about it! 3-Crap like this is there to shock us and make us all want to go buy it just to see what all the fuss is about. Narc ring a bell? You mean you get to take the drugs and hallucinate and it changes the gameplay? However, this game sucked and the hype didn't play out. GTA is by all accounts a well-made (if horrible) game. It may continue to help them for quite a while. 4-Isn't it accessible on the PS2 by going thru a cheat code? I don't have a PS2 so I can't check, but this is something I have been told. If the problem was a download then maybe I could forgive Rockstar, but if it was accessible by code, then they totally intended it to be found.

I'm sure the schoolyard is full of youngsters bragging how they have been playing the Hot Coffee mod. Shame on them. Sad that it's working so well.

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://athomemama.blogspot.com" target="_newWindow">http://athomemama.blogspot.com</a>
Gaming and Tech
Posted by (14 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No
"...4-Isn't it accessible on the PS2 by going thru a cheat code?..."

No. You have to use a 3rd party utility, like GameShark, which allows you to enter codes that would otherwise be unaccessable in the retail version. This is not some "hidden level". You can also access this on modded Xboxes, but again you're not playing the retail product without 3rd part intervention. Off the shelf, on a non-modded Xbox or PS2 you will never be able to get to this unless you use 3rd party utilities, which BTW seem to violate Rockstars EULA.
Posted by Hoverboy (2 comments )
Link Flag
Even with a modified save file
the sex scene is done fully clothed (which, if I understand
correctly, would leave the game rated M). To get the nude
figures on a PS2 I think you'd have to have a modded console
and use a modified game, not just modify the save file (and, to
reiterate, the save file can't be modified from within the
(unmodified) game itself, there is no "cheat code" such as press
up down up up down down start select (L1 L2 L3 L4 x) to
activate it.

My thoughts on this are: multiple servings of "no big deal", and a
helping of "the content wasn't actually in the game if it has to be
modified from outside the game to view it".

No big deal: a) the scene is fully clothed; b) the language and
action in the game is much MUCH more "mature" than a simple
fully-clothed sex scene (the stats for the game list how much
you've paid for prostitutes and the strip club); c) the game is
already rated "not for children"; d) to download the mod, you'd
have to get it from the Internet - if your kids are downloading
this, they're already downloading stuff you'll find much more
objectionable, and makes this sex scene downright family-
friendly; e) it's CARTOON SEX, get a life!

As for the content not "really" being in the game: where do you
draw the line for how much of the game (and the save file is as
much a part of the game as anything) needs to be modified
before it counts as "new content" being added to the game
instead of "old evil bad content" hidden in the game? The ONLY
way to view the content is inside the game, it isn't like they have
hidden video files that you can play using standard programs. I
take a hard line: if even 1 bit has to be modified (from outside
the game itself), then it wasn't there. Now, I agree that it is
possible to actually hide stuff intentionally, but I think that
should only be considered as an issue in a criminal case, with a
high level of evidentiary proof, not in something like a ratings
issue, especially between two "adults-only" ratings.

An "Adults Only" rating doesn't "shame" people into not buying
it, it simply kills off most sales because most retailers don't have
any backbone to standing up to relatively small groups of very
vocal busy-bodies, and something like this is so tame that it
can't be sold as real porn, where it might make more money.

BTW, "X" is not a rating, but NC-17 is. X is an indication of a
lack of rating, and has been associated with movies that couldn't
get a rating because of explicit sex. But you could label
anything X and no one can stop you (common usage might
prevail in a false-advertising suit, though).
Posted by ygtbfkm (29 comments )
Link Flag
subtle
One other thing: I've seen few mention that the game is very
subtle - on the surface, it promotes violence, portrays women as
prostitutes that you can beat up, lets you kill cops and drive
dangerously. However, it isn't that straightforward: there's a lot
of social commentary in the cut scenes, for instance, decrying
the build-up of violence and drug use; the characters choose to
use violence to combat that, but that leads to additional
complications. Some characters are blatantly racist, other
characters call them on it. There's a lot of background
commentary in the random chatter, too ("It's so nice being
rich!"). In addition, killing cops, driving poorly, beating up
prostitutes, are all losing propositions as far as the game is
concerned.

If you're going to complain about something, if you look closely,
no one ever dies in the game! Whenever someone is "dead", an
ambulance comes along and "makes it all better". When you get
arrested, you "get out of jail" $100 lighter and all your weapons
confiscated. Complain that there's no consequences for your
actions, except that you do poorly in the game. Except, IT'S A
GAME, even if you could burn the whole city down and everyone
stayed dead it's JUST A GAME! The consequences in GAME terms
are just about right. Anyone basing their real life on what you
can do in such a game is an idiot who was going to do stupid
things anyway (and the game is NOT giving them useful
practice).
Posted by ygtbfkm (29 comments )
Link Flag
'Shell Shock Nam '67'
I think you're a being bit naive about social stigma. Does anybody really care what gets on their credit card, as long as it isn't illegal?
Posted by ohsan (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
RE: Shell Shock Nam 67
Last I checked, your credit card would say "EB Games" or "Amazon.com" rather than "GTA3."
Posted by (1 comment )
Link Flag
Politicians arevilen like sharks
This whole thing is BLOWN all out of proportion because a few unsuccessful politicians want to get their name in the papers. It's as simple as that. We don't need more laws, the one's we have now is all that's needed. So far the law and the ESRB are doing their jobs quite well. Adult content that was hidden was found, and the appropriate action was taken. Done and done. But because of slow news days the media has taken this thing by storm, which also attracted shady politicians who apparantly have nothing to do but to go after Rockstar. So instead of working to improve the economy, dealing with poverty and education they rather deal with violent videogames. Personally any politician's name I see appear on the news because of GTA, I will never support or vote for that politician ever again regardless of party affiliation. If the govt really wants to add legistration that would really work, it would have to pass laws that strictly dictate how adults parent their kids.
Posted by Laserdisc (79 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Well put
Very well-stated. I agree.
Posted by truegenius (33 comments )
Link Flag
Fines to stores that sell the games to minors
I guess few politicians, political pundits, and reporters have ever worked at a video game store to understand how 99.99999999% of game sales work.

Little Timmy, 12 years old, puts GTA San Andreas on the counter. Somehow, he has the $50 in hand to purchase the game.

Cashier thinks to self: "Where the heck does a 12 year old get $50 in disposable income. Crud, it takes me 10 hours of working here to make that much. How many months of taking out the trash did he have to do to get that?"

Cashier says: Sorry, that game is rated M. I can't sell that to you unless you are 17.

Littly Timmy says: Mom, come over here and buy me this.

Timmy's Mom walks over and says irately: Why won't you sell this to my son?

Cashier: It's rates M for Mature and contains sexual content. foul language, and violence.

Timmy's Mom says: Whatever.

Timmy's Mom plunks down the $50 for it.

Everyone keeps thinking there is some magic bullet to solve this. Being an avid stereotypical game player, I guess that would be in the forehead of any politician using this as a platform to boost their chances at a higher office.

But seriously, lets get back to hot topics like hiding critical documents in bedrooms, lieing, illicit sexual content, and people mysteriously dieing around you. Sounds like some missions from GTA, but it's actually the Clinton Administration. Let's ban anyone involved in that from out gov't the same way that GTA has been effectively banned from stores.
Posted by (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Venice and Athens?
What? These cities thrived in a time completely different from our own, under governments that imposed completely different moral and ethical standards. Also, I don't think they thrived due to the fact that their citizens were nosy, although I don't think that that's completely true, either. Privacy, for example, came into focus since only the time of the industrial revolution. Before people didn't care that much, now they do and have a recognized right to make their own choices.
Posted by sanenazok (3450 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Community-Shame has always been a powerful tool...
I would have to agree with the basic premise of the article, "...Community-Shame" has always been a powerful tool, ...FOR OPPRESSION.

Its not so good for a "free-society", though.
Posted by Gayle-Edwards (30 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Here's An Idea
Priests molest little boys and people constantly kill in the name of religion. So while we are proposing legislation for video games for sex and violence, let's do the same thing for relgion.
Posted by SeizeCTRL (1333 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Good thing your not a politician
Wow, thats a dumb as saying "There are people use the sidewalk and hurt other people, we need to do the same thing with sidewalks."

Granted people affiliated with religion do those things you mentioned, but the religion itself does not promote it in any fashion.
Posted by Vansafe (3 comments )
Link Flag
Potential problem that could become of this
So they have changed the rating based on disabled content. Now we have an MA rated game that is labeled AO.

So when little Timmy goes to his mom and says look, the AO rating means nothing, I'll show you. She watches the game and sees nothing that she feels is offensive for a 15 year old kid (or whatever age) and comes to the conclusion there really isn't anything she feels is Adult Only rated in it and says to herself AO is OK.

Now that the kid has talked his mom into AO being OK he can get her to buy any game that legitimately is labeled AO.

Just wait until "Saints Row" for the xbox 360 is released. In the on line demos it has women in positions of giving oral sex (but no genitals are shown), however the women are topless and this game will probably receive a legitimate AO rating.

And this game being exactly like Grand Theft Auto excepting be another step in the AO direction the parents probably will get it for their kids thinking its the same thing. When in reality its worse. But the parents wont catch on to it unless they closely monitor the games they play.

I suppose this is just a stepping stone of our society becoming more and more desensitized.

And in case your ignorant to it, there are video games out there from Japan where they do promote sex, rape and pedophilia. Japan is just ahead of us on the desensitization scale.
Posted by Vansafe (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Also...
It is important to note that the sexual content is not in this game. It is disabled. Its like having a nude picture in a program that no one can view unless you hack the program.

To enabled this content you must download a hack. Which causes the player to be in sexual positions. Hackers added the content of changing the characters to be nude.

There are many hacks out there that would change the rating of games from E to AO if they were re-rated after the hack like Grand Theft Auto has been.

Also consider that TV has edited out reality documentaries of women getting their breasts examined, not appropriate for TV like that IMO, but it is OK to have since the viewers can not see any nipple. But if a hacker wrote a program you could put on your digital TV to descramble edited TV shows to show nipple do you think that they would stop airing those shows? No, and because they have been ruled TV safe it would not be fair to shut them down because a minority has chosen that they want to see them.

I do not support Grand Theft Auto. I do not play it and my kids will not either. But if we start misusing the rating system at people like this then it is going to invalidate it and the problem will become even worse.
Posted by Vansafe (3 comments )
Link Flag
My Thought
My thoughts on all this is that its ludicris i may only be 15 but i think kids should have there input on this stuff to. Me myself have never played san andreas but my friends tell me its awesome. i want to play it and by taking a game off the shelves will make more pirating of the game which in turn would cause more crime. I think alot of Adults perspectives on teenagers games is like i dont care what my kids play and i think they should care a bit more but i think kids should be able to play whjat ever kind of games they want as long as there parents grant them permission and if a kid goes hommicidal dont blame the games creator blame the parents for buying the game for the kid who played the game. But i do believe that there should be some restrictions that should be in games like i dont think that there should be hardcore sex in games because that is not appropriate. But if kids act out there violence in video games the wont be as bad in real life ive always had war and violent video games ever since ive been like 7 and ive never thought about going and shooting someone, but if you say just any violent game is causing this then what about the war video games has anyone ever flipped over a war video game not to my knowledge its always ones that arent based on millitary or police action style game i like those games and all but i like my regualr violence games. but thats just my opinion
Posted by (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
This is completely stupid!!!
This is all nonsense. First of all the rating shouldnt matter. If you can read and Im assuming most parents who are complaining about the game cant because all that theyre complaining about is a stupid sex scene added into the game by a third party. Now if sex is the problem, you should never have allowed your kid/s to get the game in the first place. It says clearly on the case that it is rated M and it also list the reasons which include Intense violence(Something that should be considered worst than sex) and Strong Sexual Content Now would someone please tell me what is meant by strong sexual content? Would it had helped if it said Hardcore Porn instead? Of course not because youre most likely a bad parent to start with.
Its not very hard to keep violent video games from kids, in fact its rather simple; All you have to do is take it away from them or just never get it in the first place. Its that easy but most parents are too fuc**** lazy to pay any attention to their kids and expect the media to do it for them.
The scene/s which are in question were added by a third party, sure Rockstar placed some code there but it can only be accessed by hacking into the game code and altering it, something done with several games, such as The Sims, but I dont see anyone ******** about that.
All Rockstar needed to do was to prohibited the modification of the game in any form and then they couldnt be held liable for anything since someone would have broken the license agreement by doing so. Another simple way to end this discussion.
Of course this is not about the added scenes its about trying to stop violent video games, but this issue just gives the ***** something to make noise about and get noticed.
If you dont like violent videogames then dont buy them and dont let your kids play them, stick with the gay Sponge Bob games. END OF STORY! Rockstar should sue for loss of sales and the cost of those new labels, and they would have an extremely good case&
"Violent videogames aren't the problem stupid people are" "Guns aren't the problem the people that use them are"
Posted by (1 comment )
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.

ie8 fix

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

ie8 fix