GTA Sex Game Leads to ESRB Fracas

At first, it was nothing more than a rumour. A "sex mini-game" in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, left in the code for the PC version and unlocked by inquisitive players. Then, as more and more information became available it seemed as though the sex game might be real. This revelation has lead to California Speaker pro-tem Yee blasting the ESRB for their apparent slip-up in examining all the content in the game. The ESRB has responded by pledging a "thorough and objective investigation" of the claims to get to the bottom of the situation. Commentary is available from Joystiq, GamesAreFun, and Buttonmashing.

This is bull

[SteveXE (641833)]

How can the ESRB or even Rockstar be blamed for this? They removed the content from the game itself, its not their fault some gamers found a way to put it back in. Its funny how these people jump on anyone at anytime for no reason at all. The game is rated mature, and unless I live in some Bizzaro World im pretty sure just about every 17 year old has either had sex or seen porn.

Re:This is bull

[jamsessionjay (802511)]

unless I live in some Bizzaro World im pretty sure just about every 17 year old has either had sex

You must be new here, may I greet you to slashdot; advertisements for nerds, stuff that won't get you laid.

Re:This is bull

[Cutie Pi (588366)]

Well aren't you special.

I've known a lot of nerdy guys in their mid-20's who hadn't even kissed a girl. Partially because of this, their self-esteem was essentially zero. Of course, as many girls will tell you, a low self-esteem is not very attractive, thus perpetuating the state of not getting laid for these poor guys.

I for one have dated a couple virgin nerds and subsequently deflowered them. I found that once they got over their issues, they were quite spectacular in bed. Non-nerds can't compete in that arena, IMHO.

Re:This is bull

[MooCows (718367)]

> Games with such sexual content are supposed to get an AO rating as far as I remember, not a mere M.

Because sex is, obviously, so much more damaging to the mind of a 17 year old than killing people.

I wonder if and when this will change in the mindset of people.
What's causing this 'fear of sex' anyways?

Re:This is bull

[schiefaw (552727)]

Welcome to America where (in the media, at least) you can kill whoever you like in as messy a fashion as you like as long as you don't show any genitals or say anything offensive while doing it.

and violence is completely resopsibily free

[doormat (63648)]

however sex does carry with it certain responsibilities

Yes, and beating the shit out of someone or shooting them several times in the chest has no long term reprocussions at all. ::biggest_rolls_eyes_ever::

The *real* reason why sex is abhorred and violence is glorified is because we're a bunch of puritans in comparison to the rest of the world.

Re:and violence is completely resopsibily free

[IdleTime (561841)]

Ain't that the truth?
I was watching "48 hours" the other day. A program about real homicide investigations, they showed the corpses laying around with brain-mass splattered around after a gun shot wound to the head, yet they blurred the tits.... Go figure!

And your eye-roll cracked me up....

Re:This is bull

[snuf23 (182335)]

Note the part in my comment where I state "Now I'm all for more sex and less violence".

I'm simply replying to the grandparent as to some reasonable concerns about sex as depicted in media.
No I don't think watching video sex leads to kids becoming an AIDS infested porn stars anymore than playing Doom leads to mass murder.
The media does project images depicting what is considered cool and kids do react to that. Why else would kids mimic the dress and style patterns media superstars?
As a nerdy kid who figured out after high school that if I dressed a certain way, talked a certain way and hung out in certain circles I took could get laid - I can say that media imagery impacts how teenagers and young adults behave.
As someone who also made bad decisions and ended up living a life close to a character from an Irvine Welsh novel - I can say from a first hand experience that cheap sex, drug use and violence is hardly as glamourous and exciting as Hollywood likes to depict it. Scary, depressing and dangerous would be better adjectives. I got out - but not everyone does. I lost several friends because they couldn't get out of the lifestyle, some are dead and some are mentally destroyed.
The fact is that depictions that show consquences of these types of behaviors are more interesting from a story perspective. A military FPS that attaches meaning to the death of a squad mate is telling a better story (single player at least).
I don't like the "it's only a game" thinking. It is a game, but games are in my opinion another creative artform just as relevant as movies or music.
I'm not asking that PacMan put on a condom before he gives Ms. PacMan a kiss in the between level animation, but in the case of a game like GTA - I think it would make perfect sense for the protagonist to buy a condom. It would work within the genre.

Uhh..

[by Anonymous Coward]

GTA: San Andreas is rated ESRB M for Mature (Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs).

So what's the problem again?

Re:Uhh..

[Jarnis (266190)]

Idiotic people whining about a non-issue?

Political pandering and spotlight stealing

[WidescreenFreak (830043)]

Exactly. This is like getting all high and mighty because an NC-17 movie has unadvertised sex in it that was left on a master replication print that differed from a screener print. There are no stronger rating in games or movies, so what exactly is the ESRB expected to do? Apologize saying, "Oh, we're sorry. That should have been Stronger Sexual Content"?

The game is not directed at kids and should not be purchased by kids. It says so right on the damned box!

Adding a topless woman in a frame of The Rescuers (Disney) ... okay, I could understand why certain people were upset by that incident. But in this case it's nothing more than the Indecency Policeman getting on his moral high horse in order to make it seem as though he's oh-so-very-worried about the delicate values of the people that he so caringly represents. {/SARCASM}

Wait a minute ... Yee's a D-California??? And he's worried about indecency? Wow! Who would have thought! (Yes, humorless mods, that's a joke.)

Once again, a politician is out to make a huge fuss to prove to his constituency that he's worthy of re-election. "Molehill, I'd like you to meet your replacement, Mountain. Mountain is going to be my new Public Relations chief and head of my re-election campaign."

Larry

[by Anonymous Coward]

I hear that there's also a code you can enter into Leisure Suit Larry that unlocks a secret driving game.

See the video here...

[Guano_Jim (157555)]

Video of the sex game, apparently. [gtanet.com]

Really. No Kidding.

Re:See the video here... Coral Cache Version

[by Anonymous Coward]

http://files.gtanet.com.nyud.net:8090/gtasa/videos /hotcoffee.wmv [nyud.net]Coral Cache Version (I averaged 63KB/sec, right before I submited on this post).

Easter egg!

[egoriot (853407)]

If the game had to be modified to unlock this, how is this different from nudie mods? Do vulgar variable names left in debugging information also constitute offensive material?

Either way, one hell of an Easter egg!

scapegoat

[gclef (96311)]

Honestly, I don't see how the ESRB could have known this stuff was there, without hacking every part of every game file. To get this stuff you have to manually change a couple game files. If it's something you have to consciously hack, and can't even get to in the course of (even wacky) gameplay, then it's not really part of the game.

Yes, the designers shouldn't have shipped the game with that stuff anyway, but that's not ESRB's fault, that's the coder's. Using this to scapegoat the ESRB is stupid.

Re:scapegoat

[UserChrisCanter4 (464072)]

Thing is, I'm not even sure you can blame the coder. Lots of games have levels or characters or what-not that are "cut" partway through the design process. These parts are "left in" because removing them introduces more QA problems than simply cutting off all access.

Then we go even beyond that. Many of those "cut" parts are sometimes accessible through codes or bugs. GTA3, for example, had a ghost town that, IIRC, could be reached if the player input a low-gravity code and flew there using the plane. Occasioanlly, you find 3rd person adventure games where the player can fall between the seams of a level to access something intended to be cut.

Problem is, this is not the case for San Andreas. These mini-games were cut, likely because Rockstar realized the outcry that might occur when the soccer moms of the world heard about it. Again, probably for QA/testing reasons, the games weren't removed entirely, but simply had all access cut.

Getting to these areas requires modifying system files; we aren't talking about a bug or a secret code, we're talking about a mod here. The uproar is as preposterous as blaming Eidos/Core for the old "Nude Raider" patches or complaining that a spreadsheet program doesn't add correctly after a library has been edited. Don't blame the programmers. Don't blame the ESRB.

On second thought, just wait a week, and the hurricane or shark attacks will have pushed this "issue" entirely out of the media.

Not sure what the big deal is

[iamdrscience (541136)]

While I think it was probably bad judgement for the creators of the game to put this in the game, it's not like this is really part of the game anyways, kids aren't going to come across the in normal play or anything. I mean, surely any person who would go through the trouble it takes to get to this easter egg would be able to find far more graphic things on the web.

Re:Not sure what the big deal is

[gremlins (588904)]

Kids aren't going to come across it because good parents would not let their young children play GTA. It all comes down to in the end that these idiots don't seem to understand that the games cost about $50 each. Kids can't afford this unless parents are giving their kids $50 dollars and paying no attation to what they spend it on. Mabey a teenager with a job could afford it but then again who cares about protecting them from this game.

Here's the Big Deal

[ObligatoryUserName (126027)]

This is potentially the death knell for the ESRB. They are quite explicit in their direction to companies submiting games - all content, regardless of how it is accessed must be submitted for rating. Indeed, I'm not even sure if the ESRB gets playable versions of the games, they ask for footage of the most extreme sex and violence in the game. (They have guidelines to let you know what's significant.)

The only enforcement power that the ESRB has is the promise that if you try to trick them they will refuse to rate your games. If they won't rate your game you can't use their trademarked logos on your games. If you don't have a ESRB logo on your game the major retailers will refuse to carry your game.

So, here's the problem. GTA 4 is going to come out sometime. When it does there will be huge demand for it. If these claims hold true, the ESRB has a choice - either refuse to rate the game, and risk undermining their authority if stores carry the game anyway (and stores have to choose if they want to sell the game themselves, or risk introducing their customers to the competition if they are forced to buy the game on the Internet), or rate the game anyway and lose the only enforcement tool they have. Either way you have a neutered ESRB.

Why do we care? Because just like the movie ratings, the game ratings aren't in existence to be a form of thought police - they're there to prevent the goverment from creating thought police. Right now creating and selling an unrated game means you don't have access to Wal-Mart; if the government was in control your unrated game would be banned outright. Goodbye indie game scene.

The ESRB itself is agnostic about what kids are playing at what age - they just want to make sure that no one goes home and is surprised by what they've purchased. If this report is true, that's one hell of a surprise.

Double Standard

[Guppy06 (410832)]

The game is already rated M because of its violence, but sex in said game has the California legislature up in arms? Of all the "bad things" in the game it's the sex that's supposed to have pushed up to Ao?

Re:Double Standard

[Siener (139990)]

Beating up hookers: OK
Having sex with them: BAD

Re:Double Standard

[Nogami_Saeko (466595)]

Ya, North American "morals" never fail to amaze me when it comes to sex and violence...

Witness professional wrestling - it's perfectly OK to beat someone with chairs and grind their face into barbed wire until they're gushing out blood, surrounded by screaming fans and such, but if you show a little sex, and the public wants you thrown in jail or worse...

So which is more harmful to kids in the longrun? Watching adults (and I use the term loosely) beat eachother's brains out on TV (something that you hope they'll never do), or watching some sex (which they're going to do anyway)?

N.

Re:Double Standard

[Catiline (186878)]

Darn tooting right, it's a double standard. "Ao" means "Sex Game", e.g. Leisure Suit Larry or those wacky Japanese "dating sims". No amount of violence will put a game there... but a single tit (or any other form of nudity) will force the game there.

Remember, this is America, land of the Free -- free to show and sell violence, to all, but not sex. (Remember Janet's Superbowl wardrobe malfunction? Lead to a $550K fine [cnn.com], one of the largest ever.)

Re:Double Standard

[Taevin (850923)]

I've never understood that tendency myself but it is what happens more often than not. It's okay for people to see or participate in (in a game) the wholesale slaughter of people but if a breast is shown for even a brief moment, all hell breaks loose. Activist groups no one has ever heard of and droves of mortified parents come out from whatever rock they apparently live under. And show a penis, especially an erect penis, and you might as well kill yourself because you'll probably be charged with all sorts of sexual deviancy crimes and never see the light of day again.

But it's okay because it's all to protect the children. Since there is no way a teenager has ever seen these parts and no reason to ever understand sex until they're 30, we MUST stop these horrible sex shows!

Re:Double Standard

[JohnPerkins (243021)]

There was a one-page scene in Mad Magazine, I think in the 90s.

Movie production studio. Guy rushes into the boss's office: "Hey, RJ, I got the ratings people to give (movie) an R instead of an x!"

RJ: "Great! How'd you do it?"

Guy: "Remember that scene where Brad takes Michelle home and makes wild, passionate love to her?"

RJ (looking excitied): "Boy, do I!"

Guy: "I changed the script. Now he kills her!"

A typical scene from GTA: San Andreas

[PCM2 (4486)]

OK, forgive me if I've missed the whole point, but i actually played GTA for about 15 minutes last night, and though I couldn't figure out what the actual object of the game was, this was a typical sequence:

1. Walk up to a random character. For the sake of illustration, let's say it's a female.
2. Start mashing buttons. Your character begins punching the female in the face, interjecting with expressions like, "You're just a bitch!"
3. Chase the character around while still mashing buttons. You will win the "fight." She will then fall over backwards, exposing her panties.
4. Keep mashing buttons. Your character will then begin violently stomping the disabled and compromisingly-positioned female in the crotch, while yelling more epithets.
5. At some point, the female character will die (become immobile and cease making noise). If you then step back, you will see a pool of blood emanating from the character's crotch area, where you were stomping on it.

Wait, so where was I going with this? Oh, right -- depicting sex in a video game is bad.

A typical scene from Pac Man

[Theaetetus (590071)]

OK, forgive me if I've missed the whole point, but i actually played Pac Man for about 15 minutes last night, and though I couldn't figure out what the actual object of the game was, this was a typical sequence:

1. Walk up to a random character. For the sake of illustration, let's say it's the pink one.
2. Start wiggling the joystick around. Your character begins running in circles while you shout out "no, run away, you stupid biatch!"
3. Keep wiggling the joystick. Your character will eventually be eaten, while you yell more epithets.
4. At some point, some music will play. Then you get to do it all over again.

   Wait, so where was I going with this? Oh, right -- judging a game based on 15 minutes of play time without reading the manual, trying any of the objectives, or even having the slightest idea that there could be a concept for the game is a stupid idea.

Stupid

[Evro (18923)]

Nobody young enough to be traumatized by a "sex game" should be playing any of the GTA games at all to begin with. Once again, blame parents.

Ridiculous!

[Quick Sick Nick (822060)]

As a parent, this concerns me.

I don't care if my child carjacks a senior.

I don't care if he runs over innocent bystanders.

I don't care if he joins the mafia.

I don't care if he kills police oficers.

I don't care if he picks up prostitutes then kills them to get their money.

I don't care if he takes a golf club and starts clubbing to death pedestrians.

But he may never, over my dead body, have adult on adult, consensual sex!

Re:Ridiculous!

[Ralph Wiggam (22354)]

That's one of things Europeans just can't understand about America. It's acceptable in America to take kids of 12 or 13 to a Schwarzenneger movie where he blows the bad guy up with a rocket launcher while saying something witty. If the movie involves people talking out their problems while there is a breast visible, then it's adults-only fare.

-B

Re:Ridiculous!

[Coryoth (254751)]

And speaking of insecure males, I suppose at this point I should say something mildly witty to point out the fact that I am, in fact, straight. Unfortunately, nothing is coming to mind except: "I'm not gay, really! I'm married! Yes, to a woman."

Which raises another interesting point - the whole US presumption that Nudity == Sex. There seems to be this idea that nudity must be entirely sexual, and hence if you're a man looking at naked men (regardless of context) you must be gay. If you ever look at nude woman, regardless of context, then its all about sex. In practice I would think it is the context, rather than the nudity, that ought to be of concern.

I think the tight binding of nudity and sex in the US stems, in a large part, from the fact that nudity is so taboo there. That means the only time you see much nudity is if you're secretively looking at porn or some such. That is, because nudity has been driven underground the only context in which it is generally encountered is a sexual one. It's rather sad really.

Jedidiah.

Re:Ridiculous!

[Zarhan (415465)]

I wonder if this is such a big deal over in Europe where the attitudes towards sexual content are much more relaxed.

I do recall hearing that when GTA 3 was released, the German version had certain "violent" features removed (I think it was the ability to kick or ground stomp NPCs that had been nocked down).

One good example is Carmageddon 1 or 2.

In US: No cuts.
In Britain: All the pedestrians (that you can run over) are zombies instead of humans.
In Germany: All the pedestrians are robots (and squirt oil when ran over).

Of course, just about the next day of release a patch appeared to restore original content.

Also, in Fallout 2, children are missing from the streets so there isn't any child-killing (actually, they are still there, just invisible, so a stray shot could do some damage...)

So, in US, they cut sexual content, Germany and UK they cut violence. Luckily, these days the Nordic countries are a region of their own in game releases and usually get completely uncut content.

Only for 18 year olds!

[iamdrscience (541136)]

Clearly this game was misrated! It's rated "M" implying that it's suitable for no one under 17 when obviously it should get the highest rating of "AO" to reflect that no one under 18 should play it.

THAT EXTRA YEAR MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE!

So how do you unlock it?

[mcc (14761)]

If you have to actually mod the game to "unlock" this then I don't see why this is the ESRB's business. The game Rockstar shipped deserved the rating it received. The game with the porn in it is a result of modification by the end user and therefore a different game from the ESRB's perspective. You could easily mod quake 3 so that, I don't know, all the textures are hardcore pornography, but that doesn't earn quake 3 an "adult" rating.

But, of course-- and this incident just goes to show this-- the ESRB isn't actually about allowing gamers to be informed about their purchases, or about allowing parents to responsibly monitor and regulate the video game usage of their children. Those things are just halfhearted side effects. The ESRB is about feeding and indulging hysteria and media hype concerning video games. With this goal in mind, of course, the ability to mod a game to unlock or insert porn becomes very much the ESRB's business.

Another, somewhat related story...

[sesshomaru (173381)]

The current attacks on the gaming rating system is having its desired effect, censorship. Not yet of the big titles, Rockstar will still fight for its number one selling franchise. But smaller games? Forget it. Unless it is considered a hot property starring $.50, you can bet it will be pulled!

Because of people like Leland Yee, the American version of Sonic Gems will be significantly different than the Japanese version:

Sonic Gems Collection US = no Streets of Rage [gamesarefun.com]

According to GameSpot, who spoke to Sega regarding this topic, the Streets of Rage games will definitely not be in the US version of Sonic Gems Collection. Ready for the reason? Chances are it's going to piss you off.

It's because Sega would have had to change the game's ESRB rating from an "E" to a "T" to accommodate the inclusion of the somewhat violent titles, and Sega opted to go for the "E" rating instead.

So, Leland Yee can sit back and laugh, haw haw.

I know my girlfriend's 10 year old daughter wouldn't be very interested in Streets of Rage, and I seriously don't think it is going to "affect" her if it were in a game. (Oh look, the little cartoon people are beating each other up, heaven forfend!) This particular case affects mostly people like me, older gamers who really want to play old Genesis games that we may have missed the first time around (I never got Streets of Rage III or Bonanza Brothers.) More broadly, it will effect games that aren't guaranteed sellers and cause the whole market to become more homogenized (while still being just as offensive to those of you who hate the ultra-violent games that are a license to print money.)

Rating system

[iamdrscience (541136)]

"M" is no one under 17
"AO" is no under 18

So to clarify, running over people, shooting people, killing police officers, stealing cars, etc. are all okay if you're 17. Consensual sex, on the other hand, you have to be 18 for.

sex vs. violence

[phriedom (561200)]

The US has strange attitudes about sex and violence. GTA:SA has (appropriately in my opinion) an M rating. The game allows you, if you choose, to:kill other gang members, cops and innocent bystanders in lots of gruesome ways (including setting them on fire or beating them to death with a big purple dildo); become a pimp; have sex with hookers; visit a strip club and get private dances; and lots of other mayhem. As part of the plot you need to kill or seduce a waitress at a casino who is into bondage.

But all of that is done without any nudity. Oh, but now it is revealed that if you hack the game you can see a blocky, pixellated bare boobie. Quick, somebody whip up some righteous indignation and start a fedral investigation! 17-year-olds need to be protected from boobies!

Re:sex vs. violence

[That's Unpossible! (722232)]

The US has strange attitudes about sex and violence.

Ho hum. Yes, we know. This point is made a million times every time a sex/violence topic is brought up re: movies or video games.

Yes, it is stupid. Yes we know about it. No, there's nothing you can do about it except keep pushing the envelope, minding your own business, writing your congressman to complain when they try to take on the role of guardian of your children, and voting for representatives that will pledge not to do so if elected.

Complaining about this strange idiosyncracy on Slashdot will not change a goddamn thing.

However, it will bore the shit out of me and anyone else that has read 2+ articles about this topic, which I would wager is 90% of the Slashdot viewers.

Satanic messages too

[by Anonymous Coward]

If you play the game backwards, satan is telling you to be nice to old ladies ...

It never ceases to amaze me how sleazebag

[multiplexo (27356)]

politicians such as LeLand Yee (Dickhead, San Francisco) can find the time to bloviate about non-issues such as this while everything else goes to Hell around them. California has huge problems, the educational system is shot, high-tech companies are moving jobs out of the state as fast as they can, it's difficult to start a business there due to the regulatory environment, the infrastructure is decaying and this useless fucktard is whining about a hack to GTA III, a game which isn't exactly kid-friendly to begin with, that allows you to see some pixellated titties.

Now, perhaps if this was the My Little Pony game and there was an easy hack to allow my little pony to join a donkey show in Tijuana and violate the PowerPuff girls in graphic detail with animations of horse-jism and blood squirting out of Buttercup as she's bent over the back of a chair and held down by the Mario Brothers and introduced to the animal kingdom then I could see some cause for concern. But for fuck's sake, it's GTA III. Leland Yee is a worthless, grandstanding sack of shit and what's amazing is that with this tantrum of his he manages to stand out from the other worthless, grandstanding sacks of shit that comprise the state government of California.

At least the moral's good

[TomorrowPlusX (571956)]

If you watch to the end of the video, you'll see the note saying "Remember, nice guys finish last".

Hey, that's good -- she should enjoy it too, fellas. I don't see the problem, they're teaching positive sexual relations here.

( Perhaps everybody's up at arms because here in America, we do it missionary only, and *only* when we need a baby. )

New warning label

[blueg3 (192743)]

Clearly they should be required to put a new warning label on the game:

"Caution: Altering this game may affect game play."

I know it doesn't seem to be altering the game, per se, and it's using built-in but inaccessable content, but really. If using some third-party hack to access game content needs to be rated, why not using some third-party hack to retexture everyone so they're naked? Should all games then get an "M" rating? If this were part of accessible game content, I could see the problem.

Re:oh man

[Rosco P. Coltrane (209368)]

Are you asking for a pedophile minigame in GTA:SA as well?

Re: Coral link, damnit.

[by Anonymous Coward]

http://files.gtanet.com.nyud.net:8090/gtasa/videos /hotcoffee.wmv [nyud.net]

Next time use coral.

Here's the ESRB's published criteria...

[Digital_Quartz (75366)]

http://www.esrb.org/esrbratings_guide.asp#symbols [esrb.org]

M is defined as "Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language."

AO is defined as "Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity."

So, how exactly does GTA:SA violate M, and why should it be in AO?

Re:Better Quesiton

[milkman_matt (593465)]

Actually this is getting to be re-godamned-diculous. A couple points here:

1) the ESRB gave this game the highest age rating possible aside from "Adults only" which I think should be reserved only for X rated type stuff anyway, which GTA (although some may disagree) falls short from this. If anything it would qualify for an NC-17 in film ratings standards, so M for Mature is more than acceptable.

1a) This guy is an ASS for blasting the ESRB for this, as they gave it a rating that dictates it shouldn't be sold to anyone under 17 anyway (essentially, NC17) what's he expect them to do? Now if they gave it an E for Everyone or something, then yeah, he may have a point.

2) "or their apparent slip-up in examining all the content in the game." now I read about this 'hack' for the ps2 version of GTA:SA and if I remember correctly in order to do it you had to copy a savegame from your memory card to your computer, edit some content on it, copy it back over to the memory card, and you're good to go. My guess is the PC version required a lot of the same hacking, it's just easier to 'enable' it due to the release of install packages for it that just modify your savegames on your HDD. Either way, Does this asshat REALLY expect the ESRB to go through this trouble to find easter eggs (for lack of a better term) like this and rate THEM as well? People had to go through A LOT of trouble in order to get their games to have these scenes in it, you can hardly hold the ratings board accountable for people doing things like this. This guy is absolutely ridiculous.

-matt

Re:Better Quesiton

[d34thm0nk3y (653414)]

Despite all this I can't help but laugh.

Like usual all of a sudden I want to get my hands on a copy of this game I have been putting off buying for months...

Re:Better Quesiton

[endy64 (891510)]

It's called "Hall of Tortured Souls", here are some obligatory screenshots: http://www.atomic-eggs.com/windows/exc.html#a2 [atomic-eggs.com]

Re:not ESRB's fault

[vsprintf (579676)]

My understanding is that the video game developers are required to submit footage from the game that is representative of the maximum level of offensive content the player is going to experience, and the ESRB rates the game based on submitted footage. If the developer doesn't disclose some content that is more offensive than what they submitted to the ESRB, it's their own fault.

From what I read, it seems the code in question was blocked off, and it takes a mod to unlock it. So the material submitted for examination would be what the normal player is going to see. It really depends on whether the game developer intended for the "mod" to be discovered and made public. There are a number of people out there disassembling game code for cheats and finding things game developers would prefer they didn't.