Newsfeed
Printer-Friendly ModeHidden game code leads to unrealistic political response
July 19, 2005 —
Back when we were all playing "Duck Hunt" or "Blades of Steel" on the original Nintendo, imagining a video game filled with extreme violence, cursing, and drugs was unfathomable. But it's a reality now.
Back when we were all playing "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City" just two years ago, imagining the game with actual sex scenes was still out of the question. But it's a reality now.
That's because in early June, shortly after "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" was released for the PC, Dutch gamer Patrick Wildenborg released the "Hot Coffee Mod," a code modifier available for download that introduced interactive sex to the PC version of "San Andreas." Shortly afterwards, the world went crazy.
Legislators, including New York Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton and (to the surprise of no one) Senator Joe Lieberman from Connecticut, have called for new federal regulations on video games. Australia has opened its own investigation into the matter, and there has been talk that Japan may ban the game altogether.
Before we go any farther, it is important to not only outline what exactly is going on, but the issues that are at hand here as well.
What Wildenborg did, in laymen's terms, was study the code of the game, add a modifier – which is common yet also infringes on copyright laws – and essentially "unlock" a mini-game consisting of interactive sex. One section of the game includes missions where the main character, Carl "CJ" Johnson, must wine and dine random girls until he is asked to come back for some "coffee." Needless to say, "coffee" isn't actually coffee, but all that is shown on the screen is the outside of the house and muffled noises insinuating sexual relations can be heard. Wildenborg's modifier enables a mini-game shown inside the house where CJ must keep the girl "satisfied;" while no genitalia is shown, different buttons enable the player to change camera angles and positions. To "win," the player must keep a steady rhythm with the directional pad or analog stick until, well, the girl climaxes.
To be honest, it sounds kinda fun. But that's neither here or there.
What is at issue here is whether Wildenborg added some code for the mini-game to happen or the makers of the game, Rockstar Games, had it hidden away, albeit highly inaccessible to play. The game is rated "M" for Mature Audiences (17 years and older) by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, or ESRB. Clearly, the Board gave out the rating without knowledge of the hidden code. There is a rating of "AO" – Adults Only – but similar to an NC-17 rating for a movie, it would cripple sales and is avoided at all costs. According to the ESRB ratings database, there are over 600 games rated "M," and only 18 rated "AO." The ESRB has opened its own investigation as to whether Rockstar intentionally left the code in the game or if this is mostly Wildenborg's doing. "So far we have learned that the 'Hot Coffee' modification is the work of a determined group of hackers who have gone to significant trouble to alter scenes in the official version of the game," the company said in a statement.
Clinton and other politicians are not buying it, and have gone on the offensive, taking Rockstar to task. During a press conference Thursday, Clinton called on the Federal Trade Commission to take "immediate action to determine the source of graphic, pornographic and violent content appearing" on "San Andreas." While Clinton is publicly wondering whether "San Andreas" should indeed receive an "AO" rating and is seeking to make it a federal crime for businesses to sell games to underaged buyers, California State Assemblyman Leland Yee is also looking to do the same for his state.
"Once again, ESRB has failed our parents," he said in a statement last week.
Now wait a minute. "Failed our parents?" How on earth did he come to that conclusion? Is he somehow implying that the ESRB knew about this hidden code and gave "San Andreas" an "M" rating anyway? If he is, then that is ludicrous.
Just because "San Andreas" has some hidden code that nobody was aware of until now does not mean the ESRB has "failed." It takes a whole lot of work to unlock a mini-game that, regardless of whether it is Rockstar's doing, isn't technically in the game anyway. Without some hacker who has way too much time on his hands, this wouldn't even be an issue.
"We urge all parties not to rush to judgment until all of the relevant facts, some of which are highly technical and complicated, have been established," said ESRB President Patricia Vance. "Any second guessing at this point would be premature and inappropriate as this investigation continues."
Vance is absolutely right. We still do not know whether or not this is Rockstar's doing, and if it is, how much they actually did do. Did they simply create some code they wanted to use, and then scrap it so they could still get the "M" rating they desired? Wildenborg says he simply unlocked the hidden, scrapped code. Rockstar says he altered it. It is irresponsible of Yee to start placing blame on the ESRB and claiming they have "failed" without the real true.
And even if Rockstar did intentionally leave the code accessible, how on earth has the ESRB, "failed our parents?" Interactive sex or not, the game is still rated "M," which means only those 17 and older should be buying it. I think I am being realistic when I figure that any 17-year-old that plays a game like "San Andreas" has already seen a porno or two. And even if they haven't, I don't understand how this relates to parents. Maybe because some parents have bought this game for their 10-year-old kids, and are now regretting it. This may be me being realistic again, but any parent stupid enough to buy their 10-year-old "San Andreas" does not have any justification in complaining about the game's contents, hidden or not.
That said, I agree with Clinton. Stores selling "M"-rated games to minors is a problem, although I have not actually seen it occur. If it were made a federal crime, that would most likely cause stores to stop selling to underage buyers. It is not out of the federal government's jurisdiction, either, as video games are an interstate commodity; as such, their sale can be and should be regulated.
However, Clinton also wants the federal government to oversee game ratings, and I do not believe that is right. The Entertainment Software Association labels those types of efforts unconstitutional, and in line with the Supreme Court's recent decisions on creative and artistic expression protected by the First Amendment, they are right.
The ESRB has not "failed" at anything, and should continue to be the voice on the game ratings. The ratings, however, need to be enforced more effectively, and the simplest way to do that is to let the federal government get involved.
But we cannot let a bunch of uptight politicians ruin the gaming industry by being unrealistic and naive.