Take-Two's "Hot Coffee" Finally Cools Down

[Dirty Harry]

http://evavhost.com/i/news/hot-coffee-controversy_52.jpg

Shacknews (http://www.shacknews.com/) has a blurb about the class action law-suit settlement regarding Take-Two Interactives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take-Two_Interactive) incident with some "Hot Coffee" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Coffee_minigame_controversy). The settlement comes in at a whopping 20 Million, which hopefully wont drag down the already trouble plagued company. Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick informs us that,

"We are pleased to have reached this settlement, which represents another important step forward for the Company,"

"The class action was related to allegations of the purported "Hot Coffee" content contained in the Company's Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas title and historical stock option granting practices,"


Catch the entire article here. (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60283)

[Johan]

Hopefully whichever moron at the company got his frat-boy/sorority-girl kicks and giggles by putting this in the code of the game was fired.

[bean19]

I still think it is retarded that this was such a big deal. There were a handful of ridiculously difficult quests with the model airplanes that were far bigger travesties. ;)

[OmegaVader]

20 million dollars for a bunch of parents who are too sexually repressed to openly discuss human biology with their kids. What a joke.

[Jotoco]

You americans are a weird people.

[pwnophobia]

ITS. JUST. SEX.

That is all.

[t3kl3r]

It's debateable that it's even sex since they're still clothed. There's less nudity there than any rated 'R' sex scene. (Unless there's some version I haven't seen)

I'm betting that a lot of people wouldn't consider the clothed dry humping in this game to be actual sex if two real people were performing the act.

I think the only reason people considered this actual sex is because they're so used to the limitations of video game media. How many years did we go where our 3d video game characters had mitten hands?

If people saw this without being used to video game graphics, they would probably just think it was a crude animation of two people being lewd, but not actually engaging in sex.

[Johan]

Most of you are missing the point entirely, but that's not surprising. It's not "what" the content was that is the issue here. The problem is that the self-regulatory (something gamers like....right gamers? :rolleyes:) system of ratings does not work if developers hide material that they have included in their own code.

People have the right to make their own decisions as to what they want to buy, but they can't make those decisions intelligently without actually knowing what the hell that content is. This isn't about sex. It's about undeclared content screwing with self-regulation and the right of people to make an educated decision about what they buy based upon what is actually within it.

If you don't want the government involved in doing the damned regulating for you, you should be pissed off at Take-Two for this whole stupid incident. The system won't work if developers pull this ridiculous shit, and playing it off as the fault of those who don't like the content in question is a dumb-ass position to take because you are, in effect, stating that YOUR position for what is acceptable is the right one, ratings be damned, and that hidden content that violates someone else's sensibilities is their problem, since of course it's "okay" after all (:rolleyes:) and shouldn't be a problem anyways.

Way to miss the point entirely, folks. Well done.

[SalaciousPuck]

Let's not make light of this. I mean, what happens when an innocent kid turns on the game to kill innocent bystanders, run over police officers and cause wanton destruction....and unwittingly gets exposed to something normal healthy people do every day.

The moral of the story is that it's fine to kill a hooker after you've had implied sex with her, but god forbid you have fully clothed, consensual dry humping with a girlfriend.

And in GTA IV.....the hooker sex isn't even implied. You pick from a list of services and it's graphic -- it doesn't leave much to the imagination. Why the double standard? I don't get it.

[TyphoidMarty]

Most of you are missing the point entirely, but that's not surprising. It's not "what" the content was that is the issue here. The problem is that the self-regulatory (something gamers like....right gamers? :rolleyes:) system of ratings does not work if developers hide material that they have included in their own code.

People have the right to make their own decisions as to what they want to buy, but they can't make those decisions intelligently without actually knowing what the hell that content is. This isn't about sex. It's about undeclared content screwing with self-regulation and the right of people to make an educated decision about what they buy based upon what is actually within it.

If you don't want the government involved in doing the damned regulating for you, you should be pissed off at Take-Two for this whole stupid incident. The system won't work if developers pull this ridiculous shit, and playing it off as the fault of those who don't like the content in question is a dumb-ass position to take because you are, in effect, stating that YOUR position for what is acceptable is the right one, ratings be damned, and that hidden content that violates someone else's sensibilities is their problem, since of course it's "okay" after all (:rolleyes:) and shouldn't be a problem anyways.

Way to miss the point entirely, folks. Well done.

Way to state any opinion not yours is wrong.

It is a non-issue because you have to apply an illegal mod to make it work and illegal mods can change any aspect of a game so it is a bullshit argument. The only reason this can stand up in court is because the code was in there even though not functioning as it was commented out.

I have released code with commented out functions in it, does that mean it was intended for the customer to use? No.

The prior commentors were making a judgement call on the "offending" scenes, determining if they were what they would think was acceptable in a game of that rating. Really a rating is a group of people doing exactly that, making a judgement call by a set of guidelines. If they had left the code in and actually said sex scene with no nudity on the box they might well have got it into the same rating anyway. It was a pathetic minigame and they realised it didn't make the cut so they axed it from the game.

I call blatant profiteering by the class actioners. I doubt one in ten of them is worried about their precious little snowflake.

[Johan]

Way to state any opinion not yours is wrong.

When you're wrong you're wrong, regardless.

The issue isn't the content, it's the inclusion of hidden/undisclosed content that made a mockery of the ratings system that so many of you feel so strongly should remain self-regulatory.

:whiny voice: "But the content doesn't bother meeeeee...."

You are here-----------------------------------------> *
*<----------------------------------------------------The point is over there.

If you have a right to determine the content you find acceptable in a game, others have the same right, and the right to know about it ahead of time, as well. Such a radical concept, too! Consumer rights! WOW!

I call blatant profiteering by the class actioners.

When you're wrong, you're wrong again, missing the point entirely again as well.

"The class action was related to allegations of the purported "Hot Coffee" content contained in the Company's Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas title and historical stock option granting practices," said the company in a press release.

You're right about the profiteering part, but wrong about who was profiting. :rolleyes: Way to defend the rights of highly paid executives to pillage a company and its shareholders, however. Stand up for the big guy against the little guy! Hell, if the executives of any company deserve to be highly paid, even overpaid, it's those of Take-Two, which we all know has been run so well. :rolleyes:

[92miata]

Most of you are missing the point entirely, but that's not surprising. It's not "what" the content was that is the issue here. The problem is that the self-regulatory (something gamers like....right gamers? :rolleyes:) system of ratings does not work if developers hide material that they have included in their own code.

People have the right to make their own decisions as to what they want to buy, but they can't make those decisions intelligently without actually knowing what the hell that content is. This isn't about sex. It's about undeclared content screwing with self-regulation and the right of people to make an educated decision about what they buy based upon what is actually within it.

If you don't want the government involved in doing the damned regulating for you, you should be pissed off at Take-Two for this whole stupid incident. The system won't work if developers pull this ridiculous shit, and playing it off as the fault of those who don't like the content in question is a dumb-ass position to take because you are, in effect, stating that YOUR position for what is acceptable is the right one, ratings be damned, and that hidden content that violates someone else's sensibilities is their problem, since of course it's "okay" after all (:rolleyes:) and shouldn't be a problem anyways.

Way to miss the point entirely, folks. Well done.

i agree that the above dude is a dork!!!!!

[murpes]

People have the right to make their own decisions as to what they want to buy, but they can't make those decisions intelligently without actually knowing what the hell that content is. This isn't about sex. It's about undeclared content screwing with self-regulation and the right of people to make an educated decision about what they buy based upon what is actually within it.

You know, I frequently read Johan's position on things and disagree with him, but he's spot-on here. Well said.

[MusicToEat]

The issue isn't the content, it's the inclusion of hidden/undisclosed content that made a mockery of the ratings system that so many of you feel so strongly should remain self-regulatory.



There's a reason why the rating systems, be it TV, Movie, Music, Video Games, Comic Books, are ALL self regulatory. It's because the first amendment prevents the government from regulating speech in this way. So please, don't act like this is saving us from government ratings.

The fact of the matter is that this code was locked away. The company didn't provide people with the key to unlock it, so why should they be responsible for people going out and finding a lock pick to get at it.

Also, the content that was broken into most likely wouldn't, as implemented, have raised the rating from MA to AO anyway. The stripper scenes are just as graphic. This is a case of morality pushers jumping at what they see as a chance to get back at a company they feel puts out immoral games and then greedy people jumping on the bandwagon.

[MusicToEat]

People have the right to make their own decisions as to what they want to buy, but they can't make those decisions intelligently without actually knowing what the hell that content is. This isn't about sex. It's about undeclared content screwing with self-regulation and the right of people to make an educated decision about what they buy based upon what is actually within it.


You know, if you take all those words in a book and rearrange them you can make them say all kinds of perverted things. Should the publishers be responsible for this as well?

[blackzc]

Hopefully whichever moron at the company got his frat-boy/sorority-girl kicks and giggles by putting this in the code of the game was fired.


Please, they whole game was that.

Personally im hoping for a hot coffee mod in the new GTA..oh yeah.!!

[Johan]

Please, they whole game was that.

You are here-----------------------------------------> *
*<----------------------------------------------------The point is over there.

It's not the content that matters, it's the fact that it was undisclosed in a system that purports to be self-regulatory.

You guys are fun. And by fun, I mean something worse. :D

It's because the first amendment prevents the government from regulating speech in this way. So please, don't act like this is saving us from government ratings.

The Constitution only grants you this privilege until five people (let's guess what job they hold!) decide it doesn't. Since we have a rather powerful political party controlling things right now that (1) does not mind the idea of regulating speech in games and (2) believes that the Constitution is a living document that should be reinterpreted with the times, you better (3) get your damn self-regulatory system working better in order to avoid five people deciding to restrict your valued speech. :rolleyes:

I am interested in hearing more regarding defending the right of Take-Two executives to compensate themselves too richly through stock options, as well. Someone run with that, please. PLEASE! :D

[TyphoidMarty]

If you have a right to determine the content you find acceptable in a game, others have the same right, and the right to know about it ahead of time, as well. Such a radical concept, too! Consumer rights! WOW!


I just do not know how to put it simply enough for you to understand, apparently.

If you open up a toaster and use it as a way to warm bath water, it is not the people who make the toaster's fault. You have used parts of the toaster to make your device but it is not following the intended function.

People had no right to know about the sex minigame because it was a locked away part of the game which could not be accessed.

If someone uses a product in a manner other than it was intended to be used, that should not be the makers problem.

[Johan]

If you open up a toaster and use it as a way to warm bath water, it is not the people who make the toaster's fault.

Hey genius; the developer included the content, not the user. If you put a porn magazine, undisclosed, inside of your user manual for your toaster, with a piece of tape over the pages, you don't get to blame the user for tearing off the tape.

Seriously...you guys are an absolute trip. You defend the right of the industry to self-regulate, and then you defend the right of the industry to flaunt those regulations by including undisclosed content.

it was a locked away part of the game which could not be accessed.

Woops! WRONG again!

Thank you for the humor.

[dr1]

The $20 million lawsuit was not brought by parents who were offended by pixellated sex (they got $35 each, back in 2007 (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=16182)). It was brought by stockholders who were offended by losing money because Take-Two had to do a very expensive recall, causing the price of their shares to fall. The suit (http://games.venturebeat.com/2009/09/01/take-two-pays-20-million-to-settle-litigation-that-sprang-from-games-hidden-sex-scenes/) alleges that Take-Two management knew about Hot Coffee and lied about it (and failed to keep proper accounts, and sold their own shares in the company, and did other dodgy things to give themselves more shares to sell). Those dodgy things got the company fined $3 million by the SEC (http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-72.htm) earlier this year, so the $20 million to the investors sounds about right.

Take-Two was investigated in 2006 by the Federal Trade Commission for misleading consumers about the content of the game. Although they were not penalised, they undertook not to mislead consumers in future, and risk being fined $11,000 per violation if they do so (http://www.betanews.com/article/FTC-TakeTwo-Settle-Over-Hot-Coffee/1149783059). This is the sort of thing that happens either when the regulator doesn't have the evidence to go to court, or figured the company has already suffered enough. Either way, the FTC was not impressed with Rockstar or Take-Two.

However,
How do I avoid the "Hot Coffee" scenes?

If you play the game as bought in the store, without modifying it, you will not encounter the 'hot coffee' scenes. They are not accessible in the retail version of the game. Playing an unmodified installation of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas there is absolutely no way to gain access to the "Hot Coffee" scenes. It is only through the use of downloadable files or through direct, difficult, and intentional modification of various game files that these scenes become available.

Given the FTC investigation, that statement would not be made on a current Take-Two website unless it were correct. The lockpick analogy, not tearing off some tape, is more fitting. It is also disingenuous to imply that the public attention given to the hidden content (Hillary Clinton et al) would have been the same if it had been non-sexual.

[Johan]

It was brought by stockholders who were offended by losing money because Take-Two had to do a very expensive recall, causing the price of their shares to fall.

This was mentioned in the OP, but very, very few people seem to have noticed this fairly important fact. In fact, one member here said...

I call blatant profiteering by the class actioners.

...in total disregard for the facts of the case and the profiteering by an underperforming executive team.

It is only through the use of downloadable files or through direct, difficult, and intentional modification of various game files that these scenes become available.

Given the FTC investigation, that statement would not be made on a current Take-Two website unless it were correct.

Bzzzt. Wrong.

Patrick Wildenborg (under the Internet alias "PatrickW"), a 38-year-old modder from the Netherlands, rejects Rockstar's claim that the mod required significant technical effort, pointing out that he only changed a single bit in the installed game's "main.scm" file, and that there is absolutely no new content that he actually created

Tough as nails...like a child-proof bottle with the cap off.

Once again, however, the fact is that the game shipped with undisclosed content, which is an incredibly stupid thing to do when trying to inspire confidence in a self-regulatory ratings system.

One can only wonder whether RockStar calculated the controversy would be more valuable in terms of marketing than the blow-back financially afterward. However, their management team is so incredibly inept, I'd be hard-pressed to make the case that they thought that far ahead, or even bothered to know what was in the shipped version of the game.

[SkylarScaling]

Honestly, it's like this is a horrible joke, and a slap in the face of American freedom of expression. God of War II had ACTUAL nudity in it, and got an M rating. And that was an unavoidable part of gameplay. GTA:SA had to be modded, and there STILL wasn't nudity.

Take-two has been penalized $20M simply because politicians like Hillary Clinton wanted to look like they care about "the children". Any 18 year old can buy pornographic material, and since GTA was rated for 17 and older, and DID NOT contain nudity even WITH MODS, this should not have been an issue.

Not to mention that the ESRB is exactly like the MPAA which provides a voluntary rating that is NOT legally enforceable. It is merely a guideline around which retailers are able to shape policy, so that they too can appear to be looking out for "the children".

The fact that this company was forced to pay such a large sum of money (or any money at all) because of inaccessible content that wouldn't have changed the rating of the game even if included as a REQUIRED gameplay element is a sign that greed and power have made a travesty of the American justice system, which is intended to protect the freedoms that Americans are so proud of.

The irony is that in trying to "protect the children" from this hard to access content, these outraged parents and politicians made it more visible than it would have ever become otherwise.

[brandonjclark]

Johan is right, regulations exist for a reason. The devs should've disclosed that information.

But, I think it's less of a big deal to dry hump your girlfriend than to fuck, beat and rob a hooker.

[Johan]

Honestly, it's like this is a horrible joke, and a slap in the face of American freedom of expression.

:rolleyes: This isn't about censorship or freedom of expression, and never was. As others have rightly pointed out, you can beat and rob hookers, among other things, in this game. It's about undeclared content in a self-regulatory ratings system that requires transparency to actually work.

It's also about a lousy core of executives busily enriching themselves at the expense of shareholders, many of whom most would consider "the little guy," but that's not exactly "salacious" enough to garner attention. After all, that's the American way...

[Isamura]

:rolleyes: This isn't about censorship or freedom of expression, and never was. As others have rightly pointed out, you can beat and rob hookers, among other things, in this game. It's about undeclared content in a self-regulatory ratings system that requires transparency to actually work.

It's also about a lousy core of executives busily enriching themselves at the expense of shareholders, many of whom most would consider "the little guy," but that's not exactly "salacious" enough to garner attention. After all, that's the American way...

I think the government needs to step in and regulate this ;)

[blackzc]

Johan, attorney at law!:D

I think we get what your saying. But as was said, Its like getting upset because someone hide pong inside a mario game.

The whole game is a about doing illegal, immoral shit. I really dont care either way. The fucking scene was the most innocent part of the game. lol