Hot Coffee

Scott Hardie | July 22, 2005
I promise this has nothing to do with McDonald's. This subject is almost too asinine for me to bring up, but I'm driven to frustration by Hillary Clinton and other politicians looking to score some quick brownie points off of boneheaded pandering to the public.

If you haven't heard, a few members of Congress have made a stink about Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for the "Hot Coffee" mod. (link) GTA:SA was released with an "M" rating for mature audiences, and of course it's extremely violent, requiring the player to commit a minimum of several dozen homicides and armed robberies to win, often stretching the total into the hundreds or thousands. As one of the mini-quests within the game, you can date women by complimenting them and buying them presents and trying to get into their pants, like a bleak, urban parody of The Sims: Hot Date. Anyway, apparently there's hidden content in the game in which you actually get invited into one woman's house for hot coffee, and you can play a sexual mini-game in which you simulate sex with her by pressing the buttons on your controller. There's no genitalia in the minigame, but some thrusting and lots of sex talk. It must be stressed that this "hot coffee" minigame can only be accessed with a mod, that is, there's no way to reach it in the game itself. PC players have to install a patch made by hackers in order to access it, and PS2 players have to use a Gameshark or Code Breaker or other kind of cheating device.

The politicians' response to this scandal makes me mad for several reasons:

A) What the fuck is wrong with them to say that some thrusting and sex talk is unacceptable in game that features hundreds of violent, bloody homicides by all manner of weaponry, including shooting innocent civilians in the head with sniper rifle and detonating police cruisers with rocket launchers? Isn't that like picking on Jeffrey Dahmer for having some unpaid parking tickets?

B) There's no way in the game to access the sexual minigame. I'll say that again: There's no way in the game to access the sexual minigame. Technically speaking, it's not part of the game, like scenes a director cuts out of a movie in the editing room. What should be obvious to anyone is that Rockstar Games originally created the minigame intending it to be a hidden Easter egg, but realized it was in lousy taste and decided to cut off all access to it. That's the same thing as deleting a web page by merely removing all links to it, the kind of quick-but-perfectly-viable solution often employed by software developers who need to make a last-minute change before going to market. Rockstar Games may have created the minigame in the first place, but they are not responsible for people accessing it using cheat software, since it's literally not part of the game itself. This is at best an accident. (At worst, it's a bona fide Easter egg that the company put in to sell more games while still distancing themselves from the content by saying "oops! you're not supposed to see that!," but I'm not cynical enough to believe that conspiracy theory.)

C) Assuming this is an accident, shouldn't Rockstar Games be commended for having the wisdom to excise this minigame before their product hit the market? They knew it was in bad taste and they took it out. Leave them alone.

D) The ESRB, which I consider clueless anyway but that isn't relevant here, did nothing wrong by approving of the game content the way it was. Not only did they not know about the sexual minigame because Rockstar Games never told them, but the minigame is not actually part of the game. For all intents and purposes, it doesn't actually exist, being some long-ago excised portion of the development code.

E) Oh dear! The game was rated "M" for players 17 and up. We can't let 17-year-olds know that men and women sometimes have sex, not until they're 18 and the "A" rating applies. (What the hell is so different about 17-year-olds and 18-year-olds that a whole letter rating is needed to distinguish between them? Why not just have the "A" rating and ditch "M" entirely?) The kids can see greater sexual content and actual naughty bits on an episode of "NYPD Blue," so let's not get carried away here.

F) Fuck Hillary Clinton. I just wanted to say that.

Scott Hardie | July 24, 2005
No comment, huh? Is that because you have nothing to say about this video game scandal, or is everybody merely avoiding this discussion because I titled it "Hot Coffee"? :-)

John E Gunter | July 24, 2005
I think stores pulling the game just because it's gotten an "A" rating, at least as far as a recent newspaper article says it has, is stupid. Don't they think that adults will go into the store and buy the game anyway even with the "A" rating.

Granted, there is a bigger market for games that cater to the 13 year old boy range, but come on, adults buy these games also!

John

Dave Stoppenhagen | July 25, 2005
I just find most people to damn politically correct all of the time. Loosen up and they might enjoy life and have a laugh or too. I cringe every time I hear about stuff like this. Now veterans are protesting the use of purple hearts being used in the movie Wedding Crashers too pick up women. I guess I see it myself as nothing more than what the movie wanted it to be, a prop that these guys use to try and pick up women rather than a shot at Purple Heart recipients.

Amy Austin | July 25, 2005
Amen, Dave... amen!

Scott Hardie | July 29, 2005
I agree, Dave. When that Purple Heart controversy came up, I read that a congressman has authored a bill making it a felony to impersonate a decorated veteran, to claim you earned medals that you did not. I can see valid reasons for this bill, since a military decoration can translate into endorsement contracts and political careers and other endeavors that trade on the public trust... but come on, cruising for chicks ought to be a constitutionally protected right. :-)

John E Gunter | July 29, 2005
[quote]cruising for chicks ought to be a constitutionally protected right.[/quote]

I agree whole heartedly, but don't forget, that should also mean chicks cruising for guys should be allowed to do things like that.

John

Patrick Little | July 29, 2005
quote]cruising for chicks ought to be a constitutionally protected right]

I agree whole heartedly, but don't forget, that should also mean chicks cruising for guys should be allowed to do things like that. .[/quote


At least until you catch one...

Scott Hardie | July 31, 2005
The L.A. Times ran an outstanding essay about this. (link)

Aaron Shurtleff | August 1, 2005
I whole heartedly agree with sentiment F, Scott! (How appropraite that it was F!)

I just wanted to say _that_!!

But seriously, the difference between M and A is so miniscule that this is just outrageously stupid. No sense even dealing with it...it's really only selling more games.

Michael Paul Cote | August 1, 2005
I think the rating systems whether it be movies, video games, music or whatever is only as good as the retail establishment 's and parent's enforcement of them. And I don't think, in the majority of cases, the enforcement policies are strict enough. I know that I keep an eye on the games my kids play, and I will not allow any of the GTA games around especially San Andreas, but I still feel that it is too easy for kids to get any rated game that they want.

Scott Hardie | August 1, 2005
Hmm, maybe we're missing the obvious. Maybe the difference between M and A is that M is for widespread sales at places like Wal*Mart and Best Buy, intended for adults being able to buy without kids being able to play, while A is intended for games so explicit they should only be available through specialty outlets. In other words, the ESRB is not saying that you're ok to play some games at age 17 and other games at age 18, but that one kind of game is appropriate for store shelves and the other is not. I don't know, just guessing here.

You're right, Mike, that it's tough to keep kids away from certain games. When I was a kid, my parents were careful when I was invited to a party (especially overnight), and they always insisted on meeting the parents, but there always seemed to be one or two bad kids who sneaked some porn or a violent game into the otherwise safe party. Hell, sometimes I was that kid. :-) I can say that parental enforcement is pointless if Rockstar Games and other manufacturers are going to lie about what's in their games. There's going to be industry fallout from this for at least a few years.