Typical
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/fun.games/07/27/game.lawsuit.ap/index.html
I just read this story about an 85-year old woman who bought GRAND THEFT AUTO: SAN ANDREAS for her 14 year old grandson back when the game was rated M for Mature. Now that Rockstar Games' dirty little secret has been exposed (basically the company admitted that sex scenes that could be unlocked were included purposefully as "easter eggs" in the game--the scenes were not the work of those sneaky programmers as the company first claimed) and the game has been re-rated AO, Adults Only, this grandma is suing the video game company because they engaged in deceptive marketing practices: mainly that they were selling a pornographic game and that they should have been up front about the scenes.
Now, I will say that it was not the smartest thing for Rockstar to have included secret naked scenes. This isn't like the time that someone designed a "naked crack" for THE SIMS, so that all your Sims could walk around in the nude--these San Andreas scenes were knowingly and intentionally put into the game and then left undisclosed at the time of rating. Not exactly brilliant. BUT PLEASE, lady, how can you draw the line at simulated computer characters having fake sex at inappropriate for your grandson's virgin senses when in fact you have purchased a game that is intended for people 17+ that allows the user to shoot and kill cops, jack cars (bitchslapping men and women in the process), run drugs, pimp out prostitutes, rob bystanders, etc. etc. etc. Even if you haven't unlocked the nudie bits, your character still has to get girlfriends as part of the game and try to lure them into bed (if you succeed, you hear suggestive moaning). This lawsuit only exposes this woman's ignorance about the video game industry: it's just like movies & television: electronic images are not a babysitter. YOU are solely responsible for exposing your children to this kind of stuff. The rating should have given you a large hint about what you were getting into, and a simple conversation with a store clerk could have exposed more about what was happening in the game. It is a free for all of debauchery (and I must say, it's damn fun to play, but I just have to remember that even though I may live in SoCal, it's not the height of gang culture any more and I can't jack random cars on the street).
I must point out that it is possible that in fact this grandmother does think that the regular GTA: SA is in fact appropriate for her grandson, but computer sex is not. In that case I guess I'm not supposed to judge her for her decision. But hopefully she has learned that in the future, when you're buying something for the youth of America, ask a couple of questions before you drop $50 on sex and violence education.
I just read this story about an 85-year old woman who bought GRAND THEFT AUTO: SAN ANDREAS for her 14 year old grandson back when the game was rated M for Mature. Now that Rockstar Games' dirty little secret has been exposed (basically the company admitted that sex scenes that could be unlocked were included purposefully as "easter eggs" in the game--the scenes were not the work of those sneaky programmers as the company first claimed) and the game has been re-rated AO, Adults Only, this grandma is suing the video game company because they engaged in deceptive marketing practices: mainly that they were selling a pornographic game and that they should have been up front about the scenes.
Now, I will say that it was not the smartest thing for Rockstar to have included secret naked scenes. This isn't like the time that someone designed a "naked crack" for THE SIMS, so that all your Sims could walk around in the nude--these San Andreas scenes were knowingly and intentionally put into the game and then left undisclosed at the time of rating. Not exactly brilliant. BUT PLEASE, lady, how can you draw the line at simulated computer characters having fake sex at inappropriate for your grandson's virgin senses when in fact you have purchased a game that is intended for people 17+ that allows the user to shoot and kill cops, jack cars (bitchslapping men and women in the process), run drugs, pimp out prostitutes, rob bystanders, etc. etc. etc. Even if you haven't unlocked the nudie bits, your character still has to get girlfriends as part of the game and try to lure them into bed (if you succeed, you hear suggestive moaning). This lawsuit only exposes this woman's ignorance about the video game industry: it's just like movies & television: electronic images are not a babysitter. YOU are solely responsible for exposing your children to this kind of stuff. The rating should have given you a large hint about what you were getting into, and a simple conversation with a store clerk could have exposed more about what was happening in the game. It is a free for all of debauchery (and I must say, it's damn fun to play, but I just have to remember that even though I may live in SoCal, it's not the height of gang culture any more and I can't jack random cars on the street).
I must point out that it is possible that in fact this grandmother does think that the regular GTA: SA is in fact appropriate for her grandson, but computer sex is not. In that case I guess I'm not supposed to judge her for her decision. But hopefully she has learned that in the future, when you're buying something for the youth of America, ask a couple of questions before you drop $50 on sex and violence education.