« How a president makes the law | Main | Google Linux. For reals yo »
January 31, 2006
Grand idiocy Legal
Imagine you’re a game maker. You have this fabulously complex world, built on fabulously complex code. You decide that your game would be improved by having a character try to get laid. The system you come up with turns out not to be much fun, and so you cut that part of the game...
Now, because that code is so fabulously complex, you don’t cut the code itself, (which might inadvertently damage other parts of the code) you just cut all the links to it. The game is still there, it’s just inaccessible to the player. Well, players are smart. Some of them are desperate for any kind of sexual gratification. And if hacking the game to reestablish those links is what is necessary to get their character (and them) pseudo-laid, well, that’s just what they’ll do. It’s not like porn is available on the internet or anything...
So, hackers hack the game, and make programs that allow others to hack the game. And then some people realize that OMG, this game about cop-killing has consensual sex!, and a higher rating gets slapped onto the game. (All of this leads me to think Jesus fucking Christ on a pogo stick! What the fuck is wrong with you people? The game is called Grand Theft fucking Auto! Why is this not enough to get your ire up? Why is the inclusion of consensual sex with the non-consensual murder so bad? but no one asks me)
Even that isn’t good enough for the city of Los Angeles: The city is now claiming that the makers of the game “hid” the code, and that by not being forthcoming about the mini-game (game inside the game) they were able to stealthily obtain a more permissive rating than they otherwise would have. Which might be true— were it not completely wrong...
Gamers hacked the program to insert code that the company did not include. This is what allowed teh sex to exist within the game. It is, in fact, illegal for the gamers to do this; but we don’t see anyone going after them. Instead the company is being sued for failing to disclose to anyone that sex was possible in the game...
And what really compounds my annoyance about this whole thing: This article in SCI-Tech magazine which seems to completely misunderstand the nature of gaming and also the nature of journalism. There isn’t even a single line in the article which would be out of place in a DA’s office press-release...
Some day when the boomers are dead, and my generation is the one which writes the news, we will be able to have an honest and realistic look at the roll of games in our culture. Until that day, however, we are going to have to suffer this bullshit...
Posted by Andrew at January 31, 2006 01:19 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.punningpundit.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/911
Comments
Give me back my flux capacitor! I didn't say you could borrow it!
Anyway, I've always been rather rankled by the double standard between sex and violence in our culture. It's perfectly fine to see someone's head blow off, but naked people? Better hide that one from the kids! Ever wonder if perhaps the mystification of the human body to children helps contribute to their "need" to explore...possibly before they're really "ready?"
The other side of that coin, of course, is the double standard of male vs. female nakedness. Female nudes? PG13 to R rating, depending. Male nude (the holy penis)? That's an R minimum...WTF?
I don't see the point in being so uppity about the whole thing, other than video games being demonized yet again. I suppose one could argue that *any* game could have the potential for sex if someone wrote the code, so does that mean all games must be rated higher? Look out! The Animal Crossing critters are having an orgy!!! Oh my virgin eyes!
Posted by: Afaeyre Maede at January 30, 2006 03:01 PM