Hot Coffee – Settled
GamerParents who’ve been reading for a while doubtlessly remember the “Hot Coffee” scandal (here’s my take on it courtesy of questions from the Dallas Morning News). As a synopsis, “Hot Coffee” is a piece of what’s called “abandoned code” – a common thing in software development. Basically one of the designers of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas created a silly sexual minigame and the code was severed from the game. It was found by a hacker and a bunch of faux outrage was the result. I mean, there was no nudity and what was depicted if you went to the considerable trouble to get it working, is tamer than the marionette sex scene in “Team America: World Police” (Rated-R) – not to mention that the game already had an M-rating and “sexual content” descriptor. The ESRB over-reacted and forced the game to accept the sales dooming Adults Only rating and the game was re-released at considerable expense for basically no reason and protecting no one. Well, Take Two settled and guess who won?
As reported by GamePolitics and discovered by GamingSteve the true “winners” here, apparently, are the lawyers. They get $1 million and, provided you can prove your fake outrage, consumers who felt cheated get between $10 and $35, provided they kept a paper trail of their outraged-ness.
Justice is served? The kids are safe?
January 28th, 2008 at 10:13 am
That is the thing that bugs me – the game is already intended *for adults* and noted that it includes sexual content. It isn’t like the kids got the new Thomas the Tank Engine game and found that by going into the roundhouse at the right time there was some covert action with Sir Topham Hat!
January 28th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Thanks for that visual, Mike.
Thanks a lot.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
In a few weeks i will be able to buy M-rated games go me.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:30 am
And who won in the end? The Lawyers. Shame though, because that was one of the best GTA games, Ever.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Exactly! Someday, you watch, Grand Theft Auto will be remembered and LAUDED by the mainstream as a “classic” and an example of gaming struggling toward art. It’s too big a cultural phenom to ignore. If you doubt that, just look at how The Sex Pistols were scene in the late 70’s versus 30 years later.
Plus,
More people played GTA than watched the Sopranos. (<- I'm not certain of that but I'd be surprised if it wasn't true.)
January 29th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Why choose between The Sopranos and GTA? I’ll be damned if I can.
January 29th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
I dunno about the Sex Pistols reference … and I say this with all love to their stuff (yes, they have been in my record collection for 30 years) …
Back then they were shocking untalented drug addict hacks.
Now they are ahead-of-their-time untalented drug addict hacks 😀
January 29th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
I like the non-linear game play, but I have never been a huge fan of GTA. That being said, this lawsuit seems kind of silly, considering who the game was marketed to. One minor complaint, though. It would have been nice if Gaming Steve, while doing his research, talked to some lawyers that do class action lawsuits before going off on the awards and attorney’s fees. $35 seems about right, considering what the game cost and considering the fact that they don’t have to pay the lawyers themselves to be a part of the class. $1,000,000 may be reasonable for attorney’s fees. Remember, if they lose, they don’t get much. I don’t do class action, but they are probably one of the most complex areas of law, often requiring numerous attorneys, accountants, paralegals, clerical staff, and others. The judge also has to approve the fees and defendent can contest them.
BTW, no fake outrage is required, just that you bought the game.
January 29th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Huh. I think accepting the “damages” requires pretending there are damages to begin with. I chose to call that “fake outrage.” Whatever it is, it’s certainly requires lying to someone. Possibly yourself.
Thanks for the post as always Steve. Always good to get an insight.
January 29th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
You are correct. I was just trying to point out that individual class emmebers don’t need to show damages, just that they purchased the game. Did the suit allege damages to class members or some kind of breach of warranty?
January 30th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Y’know…. I don’t know. Is that the sort of thing they put online? I am very curious how they came to the conclusion that Take Two owed anyone anything. Again, this isn’t a nudie shot on the opening menu. It’s extremely buried and nowhere near as bad as everyone alleges. How’d Take Two lose? Or maybe they settled?
January 30th, 2008 at 10:48 am
It looks like they settled.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Frankly, given that the publicity probably boosted sales, I’d say the settlement was a smart marketing choice.
After all, Rockstar’s target market is the sort of person who would take the “faux outrage” as a seal of approval. “This game angers people I dislike and wish to defy! TO THE GAMING SHOP!”
The ESRB might have overreacted, but I think the concern here wasn’t just for the Hot Coffee mod in particular, but for what it opens the door for. Let’s face it, if the ESRB lets something like this slide once, who knows what code might get “abandoned” in another game. It really wasn’t about Hot Coffee, it was about setting an example so that other developers wouldn’t get the idea that you could hide potentially AO-rating material in “abandoned” code that could be unlocked by someone savvy enough, to download a patch.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Well put Greg.
The ESRB was actually the only party harmed here. The content might have fit the rating and descriptor they gave, but they didn’t get to see it beforehand. I think Rockstar deserved a fine or whatever and said as much when this happened.
I blame the ESRB for not standing up for the truth. They threw Rockstar under the bus rather than even try and go “WAIT A MINUTE PEOPLE! This isn’t so bad, here’s why.”
I think they opted for the former because: 1. explaining this is hard and the press isn’t usually ready to retract or listen. 2. They hoped by blaming Rockstar and recalling the game they could make the heat go away.
Because the ESRB handled this the way they did – I have to answer this question and explain that GTA doesn’t = PORN to parents – probably for the rest of my life.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Oh and Greg, do you think it’s likely that developers will ever hide content in abandoned code intentionally? You seem to, you put “abandoned” in quotes. I’m asking because I’ve seen this before and wonder why. It presupposes a malfeasance I’ve never seen in the game development world.
March 12th, 2008 at 11:13 am
so gamerdad wut d9o u think about violant games
May 9th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Shawn if you want to find out then go to the site http://www.gamerdad.com
I’m one of the poeple who are on the site and you will probley find out about what gamerdad thinks of violant games.
Oh! there are things about rated M games as well.