Grand Theft Auto changed to an adults only game!

[DrSpike]

Didn't realise Aussies were such prudes.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Carolus Rex
Adagio,

What was wrong with my link?

Carolus

I skipped a large part of this thread... I guess I skipped a few posts too much

[Skanky Burns]

It didn't seem to be much of a problem with San Andreas though, so maybe they are more in-touch with reality now. Or perhaps the version available on the net has yet to be edited to the ratings board's liking.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Carolus Rex
I think ravagon will have a thing or two to say about that...

I am, once again, as mortally offended as I have ever been.

Or at least as mortally offended as I've been since I was last referred to as Australian.


Gameswarehouse seems to have suddenly pulled their stocks of GTA:SA. It was available last Friday but now it isn't. Gamesmarket is (apparently) still selling it though.
Neither of them pulled it when the row surfaced so I guess it'd taken a while for it to filter through.

Both of the others are available though. I'm not sure what was editted out but there's a fair bit of rather, erm, 'harsh' language left in.

Not to mention the use of various antisocial implements for those occasions in which a harsh word just isn't enough ...


As an aside I'm not sure the words 'delicious' and 'kangaroo' can be even be used together in the same sentence. Not without a qualifier before delicious anyway.

Originally posted by DrSpike
Didn't realise Aussies were such prudes.

You did too! You posted almost exactly the same thing in the thread about that last LSL game.

[Imran Siddiqui]

IS - of course Rockstar has the right to not have their games rated if they choose. And retailers have the similar right to not carry them if theyre not rated (I think many of the largest bricks and mortar retailers wont carry unrated games) If you think Rockstar and Take Two are going to make that decision out of first amendment idealism, rather than business decisions, i suspect your misjudging them. I cant see what good would be accomplished by ending the rating system - its already hard enough for parents, who have to follow different ratings systems for movies, games, and TV, each rating system being rather arbitrary (as some here have already pointed out wrt games) - do you really expect parents to know the content of each and every game?

Not my point to have Rockstar leave by itself. My point was to do away with the entire ****ing ESRB and have parents involved in their kids purchasing decisions. It'd be hard? So ****ing what?! Parents can't just drop their kids off at the interactive highway and except that the world will take care of them. Get involved with what your kids are doing! If they ask for a game, do some research.

I mean my believe in personal responsibility means that you can't just blame it on someone else when you aren't keeping tabs on your kids.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by ravagon
As an aside I'm not sure the words 'delicious' and 'kangaroo' can be even be used together in the same sentence. Not without a qualifier before delicious anyway.

You may wish to retract that statement lest someone question your sanity.

[Datajack Franit]

Yummy koala too?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[
Not my point to have Rockstar leave by itself. My point was to do away with the entire ****ing ESRB and have parents involved in their kids purchasing decisions. It'd be hard? So ****ing what?! Parents can't just drop their kids off at the interactive highway and except that the world will take care of them. Get involved with what your kids are doing! If they ask for a game, do some research.

I mean my believe in personal responsibility means that you can't just blame it on someone else when you aren't keeping tabs on your kids.

I think parents should be watch what their kids buy and play (though its not always possible - you cant monitor everything that happens at other kids houses). But to expect them to play through every game, to see whats in it, is absolutely unreasonable. Not every parent wants to play games, and not everything shows up till you get to certain levels, etc. I mean parents deserve to have a life too, ya know. They could rely on unofficial ratings by game review sites, but I dont know how that makes the situation any better than the ESRB ratings - it just makes it less convenient for parents.

If there were no ESRB rating, some parents might be more inclined not to allow their kids any games at all. Many would lean on the cautious side, and only allow those few games they knew to be ok. And of course the less responsible ones, who are just responsible enough to not buy their kids an M game, might abandon all control whatsoever, and let their kids have whatever they want (which may be what some posters prefer all parents did)

Im happy that this is rather academic for me - POTM isnt very interested in games, and the ones she is interested in I know and can judge (and are NOT violent)

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Our ratings board like to ban things very much. Sex + violence is enough to get something banned here. To get around that, GTA3 was actually edited so that you could not have sex with prostitutes (and then go on to bash them to get your money back). You can try this if you have the game by setting window's language to English (Australian) if you really like being ignored by prostitutes.

We like killing kangaroos though. They taste delicious.

bannings - so OZ is a christian Taliban theocratic dictatorship also????

Roo's - there must be a roo hunting game, like our Deerhunter, no?

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by ravagon

You did too! You posted almost exactly the same thing in the thread about that last LSL game.

I'd forgotten that.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns

You may wish to retract that statement lest someone question your sanity.

I dislike kangaroo so much that I wouldn't even feed it to another kangaroo.

[Datajack Franit]

I don't think it's parent's duty to put the nose into games?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think parents should be watch what their kids buy and play (though its not always possible - you cant monitor everything that happens at other kids houses). But to expect them to play through every game, to see whats in it, is absolutely unreasonable. Not every parent wants to play games, and not everything shows up till you get to certain levels, etc. I mean parents deserve to have a life too, ya know. They could rely on unofficial ratings by game review sites, but I dont know how that makes the situation any better than the ESRB ratings - it just makes it less convenient for parents.

They don't have to play the games, they just have to read the back of the box! Games aren't shy about what they are about back there. If they have gore or sex, they make a point to put it back there (it's a big selling point). Parents should get more involved in buying games. If your kid wants $50 for a game, you should be there with them to see if the game is suitable for the kid. Or, spend 5 minutes (at least) watching them play the game to see if it's ok. If you want to abrogate your responsibilies as a parent, don't call for the heads of the game industry.

If there were no ESRB rating, some parents might be more inclined not to allow their kids any games at all. Many would lean on the cautious side, and only allow those few games they knew to be ok. And of course the less responsible ones, who are just responsible enough to not buy their kids an M game, might abandon all control whatsoever, and let their kids have whatever they want (which may be what some posters prefer all parents did)

Yes, many would lean on the cautious side and actually BE PARENTS! They would do their homework for once and not really on the X-Box to be a babysitter.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

They don't have to play the games, they just have to read the back of the box! Games aren't shy about what they are about back there. If they have gore or sex, they make a point to put it back there (it's a big selling point). Parents should get more involved in buying games. If your kid wants $50 for a game, you should be there with them to see if the game is suitable for the kid. Or, spend 5 minutes (at least) watching them play the game to see if it's ok. If you want to abrogate your responsibilies as a parent, don't call for the heads of the game industry.

Quite.

[lord of the mark]

for all the ESRB ratings have been problematic, I cant see that box art is a clear guide to content - i mean thats a couple of pics, and a brief description, of sometimes huge game worlds. I mean i dont usually buy this kind of game, but my general experience is that box are leaves alot to be desired in really understanding what a game is all about.

And of course doesnt help at all if youre buying a jewelcase edition, or whatever. And i hardly see how reading the marketing material on a box means being an involved parent - its not time spent interacting with your kid.

Also i fail to see how it addresses the issue in question here - the material that Rockstar failed to inform the ESRB about, it also failed to describe on its boxes, I presume.


Ive tried to avoid saying anything about the specific content of GTA, as i havent played it. It would be nice if those who havent actually parented would show some humility in regards to whats involved in parenting.