M rated Video games

[Humphrey]

Ok yuo all know my stance on the subject. But some people just get on my nerves. This is not political talking, i could care less who said it, they are 100% wrong in their views on the subject. They talk about games they do not know about or even play, and they mislead the general public.

Take: Leland Yee. (source of rant: Link) Mr. Yee believes that the game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is not for children. He does not approve of the violence in the game. (Well technically the violence and sex, but we will talk about that later). He feels that with the amount of violence in tha gem, it should be adults only. and that ESRB, a board of people who rate games should rate it accordingly. And you know what they did. They game the game a "M" rating. That means that nobody under 17 can purchase the game. Nor an they play it without adult's alloing them to. But for some unknown reason Mr. Yee wants GTA: SA rated AO, Adults Only. Thus means: "[from www.esrb.org] Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.".

I have played GTA: SA and it has none of this. Violence is not over the top. Frankly its very minimal compared to other games in the FPS genre like Manhunt and Soldier of Fortune. But doe he go after them to get them AO? No becuase this person wants publicity only, so why go after a sevberal year old game?

You want to know what he vbases the nudity and sex on? Leftover code in the game files. Yup, this stuff never, ever appears in the game. The only way to acess them is to crack the code and use a illegal 3rd party software to get it. Evenm then according to those who have played it its very buggy and obviously thrown out before it was even completed.
There is no way this should give the game a AO rating.

Nuditty? None. All strippers wear clothing or undergarments. Same with Hookers. You pick up a hooker in your car? The camera goes to the bumper of the car and you see it bounce. That is all. No nudity or even people steaming up windows is seen.

The game is already illegal for minors to purchase. so what will this person accomplish by making it AO? The same people who cna buy the game as a M are allowed to buy it as AO. The only thing is at home AO, children are not allowed to play it.

This transitions me to another tppoic that i have been tlaking about for a while. This is the same thing that happened to Comic books. For some idiotic reason the average Adult feels that video games are for children. They do not believe that video games are made for adults or teenagers. So they buy them for their kid thinking its a safe thing for them to play. They cannot be more wrong. The average game nowadays is not made for even teenagers. They are made for people in the 20-50 market. Take a look at your average store shelf. A majority of the games are rated M or Teen.
The only games that are rates Everybody or safe for kids are the simulation sim city type games and those in the isle with big pictures of spongbob on the cover.

By tagging a game with Ao they will cause the game to fail. Very, very few game shops will carry a AO only game, especially Wal-mart, the biggest game seller out there.

These people who never play the games they rant on talk big, and try to mislead the average citizen, and it just anoys me to heck. Leave the games alone. The se games are not making your child pick up a guin and shoot people. Yopur kid is already messed up in the head, it is your fault for letting them play the game you had to buy for them. It is your fault for not recognizing the problems in your child. Do not blam them on some game manufacturer. There is not a single game out there telling kids to shoot a poliece man in real life. None. So get off our backs and go do something with your time thats worth something that will actually do something.



In the end the thing this guy is proposing is stupoid. Remmebre the game is already illegal for anyone under 17 to purchase. So whats the point of making it Adult only? Is he going to have a poliece man stand next to every single computer in america making sure that people who buy AO games never let their teenage kid look at it?

[mid]

You want to know what he vbases the nudity and sex on? Leftover code in the game files. Yup, this stuff never, ever appears in the game. The only way to acess them is to crack the code and use a illegal 3rd party software to get it. Evenm then according to those who have played it its very buggy and obviously thrown out before it was even completed.

If he wants an AO rating based on nudity post-hacking, I can safely assume he wants the same for Tomb Raider, Unreal Tournament, Quake 2 and 3 and every other game in the long sordid history of 3rd-party nude skins?

[Humphrey]

Ill be frank. im basing my rant off of the gamespot article. which in itself will be biased. So he might say something else. But i have played GTA:SA. there is no nudity in the game.

edit: specifically he says "explicit sexual scenes". This is again refering to the hidden code. There are no sexual scenes in the game. All is hidden.

you do see strippers, they talk about sex, but there is no sex seen in the game. So my point still stands.

[jumbo]

I had a funny feeling this would be about gta from the thread title. The game is violent but is nothing compared to unreal tournament or other like it. In GTA:SA youll see a level of violence on a par (at most) with what you'd see on a movie screen in a summer blockbuster or something like that. As for the nudity and graphic sex claim i reckon anyone who claims that has gone and put the wrong dvd in the drive. This game contains verbal references to sex in places. Hence it has an 18 rating in the UK for sex and violence but that doesnt deter stores here from selling it. The sex is however far from graphic at its most lurid its a cars suspension bouncing. I fell here is a case of Mr Lee jumping on a bandwagon which will guarantee column inches.

[Tranquility]

It's obvious it's just a publicity stunt. GTA SA teaches you to kill people? Unreal Tournament 2004 lets you play Insta-Gib matches with one shot kills to improve your aim. And when you kill 4 or 5 in a short interval, the in-game commentator pumps you up even more by shouting "M-M-M-Mooonster KILL". But there's no comparison, what with the mainstream popularity of the GTA series.

Re: The nudity in San Andreas. That code was obviously scrapped to avoid an AO rating. As Humphrey said, most game shops don't carry AO titles as standard policy. AO ratings are usually only for games that have explicit sex or nudity, the violence doesn't really factor in. I mean if a WWII shooter like Call of Duty or Medal of Honor can get a Teen rating by not including blood, despite the intense violence in the games, you can tell that it's difficult for any game with blood in it to achieve the level of violence required for an AO rating. This is also confirmed by the fact that you need to be 18 to buy an AO game, and 17 to buy a mature game. It doesn't really make much of a difference, except in shelf space in game stores.

[Tranquility]

One more thing, about those jumping on the videogame violence bandwagon.

The Taser Foundation is now also protesting a game that will be published by Eidos, called 25 to Life, after Senator Charles Schumer and Nancy Grace criticized it publicly earlier, giving this game entirely more publicity than it deserves. Probably something Eidos never dreamed of.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59705

Now this isn't a prediction that the game will suck, although it probably will, if Eidos' latest efforts are an indication (think Tomb Raider), especially since the game wasn't really so anticipated earlier. I don't claim to know the plot of the game because I never did hear about it before it came under fire, but I don't see anything in what's being criticized in the game that hasn't been done before in other games, particularly GTA.

Now granted these other games also came under a lot of flak, but what do public figures want besides a mature rating slapped on the cover? Doesn't demanding that retailers don't carry the game at all violate some sort of free speech doctrine? Why isn't it enough that a game gets a Mature rating, but it's okay for a movie to have nudity or extreme violence if its simultaneously rated above 18, but is very easy to find and get into, and is available in all mainstream cinemas? Unlike an AO game that's hidden from the public. Seems to me the retailers should be getting the flak for selling mature games to minors, and not developers or publishers for putting out games that have what these people deem excessive violence.

[Frog march]

They sould bring out a game where the objecting of the games is to chase and beatup such idiots as Mr Yee.

[Tranquility]

If I were the ESRB (objections to how it is a possible that I, being an individual entity can morph into a much larger group entity notwithstanding) I'd impose bans on games that suck.

[farmerjumperdon]

What is the appeal of these games? I'm not anti-game, just don't see any appeal in them. Has pushing buttons and the resulting reward of fancy imagery somehow supplanted actually experiencing the real world as a way for kids to have fun? When I was young (and still to this day) there was no way you could even get me in the house before dark, much less sitting in front of a video screen. If I wasn't playing sandlot pick-up ball or shinny hockey, I'd be out climbing trees or inspecting the strange bugs or just riding bikes or something. I won't eat dinner until after dark on most days just because I hate wasting daylight. It's either gardening, skydiving, hiking in the woods, or even just laying in a hammock. Wouldn't even think of sitting in front of a video game as a manner of personal entertainment. I find it strange, not bad (well, . . . bad if I was doing it), and just don't understand the allure.

Oh yeah. I'd rate them all EUR - Extremely Un-Real. I hear people gushing about how real some games are. I have never seen one, (and I have seen most all of them), that is any more realistic than the average cartoon. The definition of real must have changed since I was a teenager.

[Tranquility]

Well, I don't know what to say to that. Urban life is different. I can't engage in all those outdoor activities you just listed except maybe riding a bike. Living in a bigger city sort of restricts what you can do outside. Plus college or work takes up most of the daylight hours anyway so there you go. It's also easier for me to boot up Half-life or Halo than to put on football boots and look for 10 other friends that might want to join me for a game of indoor football (or soccer, pick your poison). I prefer playing PC games than another person who might prefer to go outside and walk in the sun. Just like I don't like sushi and someone else does.

[farmerjumperdon]

Yeah, I hear you on the personal preferences thing, which is why I won't say they are simply bad. One person's entertainment can easily be another's torturous boredom. The thing that bothers me is that games are marketed in a very manipulative way to very young people. I think it was one of the big auto makers that got embarassed by some internal memos that stressed the company position that marketing starts when their customers are 6 years old, not when they are ready to buy. McD's does the same thing, marketing to 3 year olds so that stopping for a quarter pounder and a large fries as a teen seems the most natural and logical choice in the world. Like the song says, It ain't rebellion when you're drinking what they're sellin. I know, bad analogy since nobody said anything about rebelling.

For a really great read about the distortions we accept as normal and how the media (specifically TV) influence in ways that can hardly be imagined, check out a book titled The Age of Missing Information. It's a great reality check on what's important in life.

So you live in a city without parks? Even as recent as 10 years ago, when I lived in Phoenix AZ, all I had to do was walk to the park. There were pick-up games of all sorts most hours of the day or night. Maybe things have changed that much?

[Frog march]

I don't play on my playstation anymore(partly because it is broken) but I can say, from my experience, that people wouldn't play computer games just because of the marketing. If they're no-use then no-one is going to sit for hours playing on one.

Where as McDonalds food is quite nice in some ways.

[farmerjumperdon]

If you think people's behaviors are not influenced by the slick tricks of the marketing industry, especially when they begin when their intended audience is very young - then they already own you (or at least your purchasing habits).

The whole idea of cool, in, hot, styling etc. is driven by someone trying to sell you something. There is no inate human need to be any of these things. It is 100% created by someone selling you the idea you should be some way you might not yet be; and then being there to sell you the goods to help you be that way.

Then, as soon as it starts to become mainstream, the next generation of cool must be fabricated, in order to keep the assembly lines busy.

Think about Coke. They spend untold millions on advertising. Do you think it is an attempt to reach the 6 people on the planet who are not aware of Coke? It is all about selling the image of cool and looking good, and connecting that to Coke.

You were conditioned to like McD's and are now addicted to it. A little sarcasm there, but with more than a grain of truth. To some degree or another, you were mentally (almost spiritually) manipulated to wanting that goo long before you ever ate it.

[Normandy6644]

You want to know what he vbases the nudity and sex on? Leftover code in the game files. Yup, this stuff never, ever appears in the game. The only way to acess them is to crack the code and use a illegal 3rd party software to get it. Evenm then according to those who have played it its very buggy and obviously thrown out before it was even completed.

If he wants an AO rating based on nudity post-hacking, I can safely assume he wants the same for Tomb Raider, Unreal Tournament, Quake 2 and 3 and every other game in the long sordid history of 3rd-party nude skins?

Don't forget The Sims.

[Tranquility]

I don't think the marketing analogy works with games. It's arguable that games that are more hyped usually score, but gamers in general go by word of mouth in their purchases. If eary adopters decide that Devil May Cry 3 is too hard, usually the more hardcore gamers will be the ones buying it. If reviews give Star Wars Republic Commando low scores, but most of those who actually play it say it's a lot of fun, gamers will buy it. I dunno if it has to do with the fact that gamers are mostly online-aware and consume gaming media to a great extent. But I'm pretty sure marketing is not the major factor in deciding whether certain games are successful.

There are numerous examples of games advertised on the major gaming websites like Gamespot and Gamespy, as well as in major PC gaming publications like PC Gamer and Computer Gaming World or Electronic Gaming Monthly that have seriously flopped. The best example is the Atari published Driver 3. I don't recall the exact figures spent on marketing, but they were absolutely massive for a game. Driver 3 was one of the most highly anticipated sequels of 2004, yet it flopped so badly and was so badly received for being buggy and just plain rubbish despite the large marketing dough that was poured in by Atari. Not because marketing didn't do its job, but because word spread that the game was bad. This marketing flop was a major reason for Atari's losses over the past year, and things are increasingly looking bad for them after they lost the Unreal Tournament license to Midway.

[Humphrey]

I play games for the friends who play them with me, becuase they are alot of fun, and for stress relief.

I agree with farmer.....and Tranquility. [stop staring at me like that ill explain!]
No question marketing does play a large part in the video game insudtry. It is one of the biggest reasons for soaring prices of console games. Perfect example: Halo 2. Massively hyped and market game. I mean you could not walk two feet in the veido game stores or two sentances on a gaming website or magazine withoput mentions of it. Hell Even my beloved PC gamer talked about Halo 2. When the game came out millions bought it. Weather they liked it or not was not the care of the game companies. The games were bought.
And marketing has alot of long term deals too. People get alot of company brand names in their head. They know that if a game is coming out by company x, they must buy it because company x's last game was sooo good, this one must be too!.
One of the perfect examples of this for me was Maxis. I bo8ught nearly every Maxis game that came out just becase they were from the company. i loved it. This was 100% pure marketing i know now. I now know that their name really has little to do with the comapny itself.
Farmer talked about m,arketing well, so ill let him talk more, im rambling and my brain is screaming at me to get lunch.

But i agree with tranquility too on many points. Most games that turn out to be horrible will not be bought. Word of mouth is huge in the gaming industry. People buy games because their friends do. So if a game is horrible, they will find out. Just those fooled by the marketing schemes will be screwed. Driver 3 was a perfect example like tranquility expolained. Even the best marketing campign in the world cannot defeat word of mouth. The publishers know this. Take Star Wars Galaxy. Very, very hyped game. Very massivbely marketed. Yet once gamers got a chance to try it out? They left in droves. They hated the game.

Im rambling here so ill stop, if i think of other things after i get some food in me ill say something. :-)

[Tranquility]

Just taking time out of the day right now to point out, now that Halo is mentioned, that I don't know why the heck that franchise is so popular .

I haven't played Halo 2 so I can't judge based on that, but I did play Halo: Combat Evolved on the PC (which is essentially the same game, without co-op but with multiplayer support) and I don't know why that game got so many sales, or why it practically carried the Xbox initially, or why it was rated higher on many websites than Half-life. The game sported the worst terrible design I've seen since I started playing first person shooters. It made playing through the game (particularly the infamous Library level) by and large a chore. Not fun. I dunno if Halo 2 is much better or not, but it puzzles me how the franchise took off based on the first game which was really nothing special.

Maybe the comparison is flawed though, maybe there just weren't many good FPS games on consoles when they were rife on the PC.

[Yoshua]

I'm curious, when did it actually become law for retailers to follow the ESRB? I'd imagine it'd be state law, not federal in any case.

I remember when the ESRB came out, it had no real effect on me because I was an adult at the time. Well I guess you could argue it may have affected me indirectly if it caused game developers to change or abandon games that would get too high of a rating, but I've been happily gaming since it's inception so I don't know that it's really hurt me. Anyways, when it came out, it was entirely voluntary. Just a guide for parents to use when buying games.

I've noticed that the ESRB is stricter than the system used for rating movies. Take your average M rated game, use the same level of graphic violence and harsh language and you'd probably only wind up with a PG-13 rating most of the time.

Plus I scoff at the whole idea anyways. This method is even less likely to keep games out of kids hands than keeping kids out of R rated movies. There is no real age verification for online ordering after all, and banks have setup programs for parents to give their kids debit cards.

Walmart might balk at the idea of carrying a AO rated game. Places like Gamestop or EB Games are less likely to care if the game is going to be a seller. Point is, AO rating is not doom and gloom for a game. I'd say the reason you don't see more of such games on shelves is due to the fact that such games are A) rare, B) not seen as good sellers, and C) more likely little more than thinly disguised pornography (I really don't care to see hentai games imported from Japan, their idea of sexy is the stuff of nightmares).

If anything, doing this will just mean AO starts getting applied to more mainstream games and you will see them on shelves. Places like Walmart, Gamestop, EB Games, etc are businesses, they are not going to turn their backs on something that will make them money (barring something being truely obscene or dangerous).

I understand your frustration Humphrey, but I wouldn't be overly concerned by the posturing of a pompous public figure.

[Yoshua]

Just taking time out of the day right now to point out, now that Halo is mentioned, that I don't know why the heck that franchise is so popular .

I haven't played Halo 2 so I can't judge based on that, but I did play Halo: Combat Evolved on the PC (which is essentially the same game, without co-op but with multiplayer support) and I don't know why that game got so many sales, or why it practically carried the Xbox initially, or why it was rated higher on many websites than Half-life. The game sported the worst terrible design I've seen since I started playing first person shooters. It made playing through the game (particularly the infamous Library level) by and large a chore. Not fun. I dunno if Halo 2 is much better or not, but it puzzles me how the franchise took off based on the first game which was really nothing special.

Maybe the comparison is flawed though, maybe there just weren't many good FPS games on consoles when they were rife on the PC.

Heh I had very similiar feelings about the game. Though I didn't think it was a bad game. I just did not see why everyone trumpted it as being the best thing since sliced bread.

Nothing was unique or inventive. We've had vehicles in FPS's since Tribes (a game WAY ahead of it's time). The weapons were standard fare. The models and textures were nothing special (not bad, but you can find much better in any number of PC games). While I enjoyed playing it (was with a friend on the X Box), I dont' understand all the hype from fans (from the company selling it, yes, from the fans, no). Even the story was pretty forgettable.

When I finished Halo, I felt like I was done, no need to pick it up ever again. When I finished Half Life 2 I was starving for more (they end it on a cliffhanger too).

[Tranquility]

When I finished Halo, I felt like I was done, no need to pick it up ever again. When I finished Half Life 2 I was starving for more (they end it on a cliffhanger too).

It's all because of the level design. Heck, one can write a walkthrough for HL2 using just the gravity gun. The levels in HL2 were varied and you could always try new ways to kill zombies or Combine forces since the weapons arsenal was so varied. The atmosphere was superb.

In Halo, the level design, particularly the interiors, felt very samey and repetitive, like Bungie ran out of ideas and decided to copy and paste sections and corridors. Very boring. The outdoor levels were slightly better, though the appeal of the vehicle combat is reduced when you're playing alone. With the Waarthogs, you were forced to drive if you were in single player.

BTW, RE: the argument regarding realism. Games using modern engines like HL2 and Doom 3 look more realistic with regards to the surfaces in the game. But sometimes a game like Doom 3 overuses certain texture mapping techniques that give a slightly unrealistic look to things, like plasticky human skin and stuff like that. The HL2 engine is the closest to realistic that games have reached, and with the addition of HDR lighting, the games start looking more real. I posted screenshots earlier from the upcoming Unreal Tournament 2007, which uses the Unreal engine 3 and HDR technology. Check it out here:

http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=21615

Also, here's a witty but nice comparison of the best game engines out there, comparing them approximately to what a real rock looks like. The Crytek engine powered Far Cry, the Source engine powered Half-life 2 and the Doom 3 engine powered Doom 3 as well as other upcoming anticipated shooters like Quake IV and Prey.

[farmerjumperdon]

I should have been clear that I didn't mean the marketing of individual games. I meant that today's youth have been pre-conditioned to want to play electronic games in general. I would not argue the pros and cons of any one game - I do not play any of them. There is a reason their appeal to my generation is so low. It has to do with the fact that we grew up in a world where kids pretty much went outside to play whenever possible. By marketing manipulation I meant that entire generations have been trained to think that sitting in front of video games for several hours per week is normal.

People get conditioned over such a lengthy period of time they usually have no idea it is even happening. Fast food is the same thing. Most of the people that eat at these places know exactly what they are going to order before they get there. On the occasion when I do eat fast food, the workers are usually disgusted with my need to review the menu. How pathetic and utilitarian has snack time become when the most important thing is to get the heck out of the way so the next person can order.

These things did not happen overnight. It's a slow and carefully executed plan to get as many people as possible to behave like good little predictable drones, especially in their spending habits. Purveyors of material goods want to be able to count on every household (preferred size of 4.1 people) having 2 cars, 1 x-Box, 3 TVs, 2.4 cellphones, etc. We are hammered constantly with text and imagery that tells us how we should be, or how we could be. That is the context for my criticism of how these games, and most everything else is marketed.

But then again, sometimes I just need to take a pill.

[ZaphodBeeblebrox]

But then again, sometimes I just need to take a pill.

Blue, or Red?

:P

[Gullible Jones]

I can see why GTA ought to be rated AO... It's a game where you go around shooting innocent people! I mean, WTH?!

[Tranquility]

I can see why GTA ought to be rated AO... It's a game where you go around shooting innocent people! I mean, WTH?!

That's not really the point of the game. You CAN shoot innocent people, but what game doesn't let you shoot non-playable characters? Those Combine forces in Half-life 2 that I had to kill were mostly innocent workers who needed to earn their lunch money, and went on to work for civil protection.

Once more just because a game lets you kill people doesn't mean it gets AO rating. EXCESSIVE PROLONGED violence earns an AO rating. Even that politician criticizing the game called for the AO rating because of the nudity mainly.

I mean come on, by this account a game that lets you bomb houses or enemy villagers in a real-time strategy game using MiG fighters or Aurora bombers should be adult only.

[Kristophe]

When I finished Halo, I felt like I was done, no need to pick it up ever again. When I finished Half Life 2 I was starving for more (they end it on a cliffhanger too).

It's all because of the level design. Heck, one can write a walkthrough for HL2 using just the gravity gun. The levels in HL2 were varied and you could always try new ways to kill zombies or Combine forces since the weapons arsenal was so varied. The atmosphere was superb.

Ya huh. And the gameplay. When they ported Halo to the PC, they kept the control sensitivities as they were for the XBox controllers. I tried my hardest, and I just couldn't get it to function in the same twitch shoot configuration that I use for ALL of my other FPS games. They entire game just felt a little clunky, and not up to my standards or meeting my tastes. And that's on top of the fact that Wolfenstein 3D or DooM had better and more interesting level designs over a decade ago.

[Kebsis]

Excuse me for not reading the thread, I'm in a rush. But I apologize in advance if this has been covered.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/

I'll comment later tonight.

[Brady Yoon]

I'll try to present my opinion from an objective viewpoint, then state my opinion.

First of all, I am strongly against most kinds of censorship. I believe that games like GTA are not detrimental and are even beneficial to society. I play GTA games, and it's a good time to relax and have some fun with my friends, after long hours of studying, homework, and stress. However, it might not be that way for other people.

Seeing as all of us on the board are more mature than the average gamer, there may be some people who experience problems as the result of playing GTA. People who can't find the divider between reality and fiction. We may say that the people who say these games should be rated AO are overreacting, but the truth is that there always will be some people who will be negatively affected by these games. People have actually said they killed people because of influence from GTA.

But what does that mean? Not much. People get this influence from all sorts of media. Not just games. And experiencing these things is a part of growing up. The vast majority of the population is sane enough to understand that this is just good clean fun, and they learn to separate fiction from fact.

My final conclusion is that while these games may negatively influence some people, an AO rating is ill-advised for several reasons.
1) People who commit crimes because of games are already on the wrong track.
2) The gaming industry will collapse.

I'm sure what I have said is a regurgitation of many people's opinions, nothing new or original here. Basically, violence is real. Not everything's peaceful and rosy, and learning that as a young age isn't always bad. It teaches people what real life is like and forces people to mature and separate reality from fiction.

So... what do you guys think of GTA: Liberty City Stories on PSP? :wink:

[Tranquility]

And the ESRB will investigate the San Andreas sexual minigames.

TBH I think it was a very stupid move by Rockstar. For those who don't know about the mod, it uses a third party tool to unlock a sex minigame. Also, the code for the mod was already existing in the game, and not introduced by the 3rd party modders, which differentiates this situation from the naked mods for the Sims, Tomb Raider, et al. It's obvious Rockstar wanted to include the feature but avoid an AO rating. So they left it there for modders to unlock it.

[Brady Yoon]

And the ESRB will investigate the San Andreas sexual minigames.

TBH I think it was a very stupid move by Rockstar. For those who don't know about the mod, it uses a third party tool to unlock a sex minigame. Also, the code for the mod was already existing in the game, and not introduced by the 3rd party modders, which differentiates this situation from the naked mods for the Sims, Tomb Raider, et al. It's obvious Rockstar wanted to include the feature but avoid an AO rating. So they left it there for modders to unlock it.

That is pushing the limits, I have to agree...

[Normandy6644]

And the ESRB will investigate the San Andreas sexual minigames.

TBH I think it was a very stupid move by Rockstar. For those who don't know about the mod, it uses a third party tool to unlock a sex minigame. Also, the code for the mod was already existing in the game, and not introduced by the 3rd party modders, which differentiates this situation from the naked mods for the Sims, Tomb Raider, et al. It's obvious Rockstar wanted to include the feature but avoid an AO rating. So they left it there for modders to unlock it.

I never heard about this. What is it and why is it causing so much controversy?