Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Hot Coffee Content Within GTA Confirmed

Posted by Zonk on Sat Jul 16, 2005 07:05 AM
from the enough-with-the-coffee dept.
Entertainment Games
Gamespot has confirmed, via a long and involved process, that the PS2 version of GTA: San Andreas contains the 'Hot Coffee' content. This essentially means that Rockstar was untruthful when it previously stated the content was added by a modder, but "Given that the minigame is about as raunchy as an episode of Sex and the City, cannot be accessed without entering a long string of cheat codes, and takes several hours of effort to access, charges that San Andreas is 'pornographic' may seem extreme to some."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Take Two Settles Hot Coffee Suit For Millions 46 comments
Amidst the furor over the various Manhunt 2 controversies, Take Two has announced that it just dealt with its last big scandal, Hot Coffee. Kotaku has the release from the publisher, in which it states that the class action suit leveled against it some two years ago has ended in a settlement that may end up costing the company as much as $2.75 million dollars. "The lawsuit against Take-Two is still pending, but should the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York agree to the settlement, claims against the company will be dismissed 'without any admission of liability or wrongdoing by Take-Two or Rockstar.' The publisher says that it will pay out between $1.025 million and $2.75 million in settlement benefits, which range from an edited copy of GTA: San Andreas to a cash payment up to $35 for those who can provide proof of purchase of the game from before July 20, 2005."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Hot Coffee Content Within GTA Confirmed 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • That's what I was afraid of. (Score:4, Funny)

    by thenetbox (809459) on Saturday July 16 2005, @07:15AM (#13080623)
    cannot be accessed without entering a long string of cheat codes, and takes several hours of effort to access

    That's what I was afraid of. Does any one have a torrent for the video?
  • Doesn't matter what it takes to get to the mini-game. It's the content that matters, and after watching the video, yeah. It's pornographic. My wife and I don't have sex that hot.

  • Heh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Punboy (737239) on Saturday July 16 2005, @07:22AM (#13080636) Homepage
    Thats what you call.. cali-fornication :-p

  • for the love of god - who CARES?!?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sinner0423 (687266) <sinner0423&gmail,com> on Saturday July 16 2005, @07:23AM (#13080640)
    Why is this such a big deal with (insert FOTM political retard here) and not with everyone else who has played the game?

    Virtually murder scores of people, have gang wars, steal a car, blow up a military base, do drugs, but the second sex comes in to the picture - it's horrible and it kills little baby angels!

    This drama has gone a little bit too far, and I really hope the only thing it manages to do is bolster sales of GTA:SA.
    • The "big deal" is that San Andreas was given a M- Mature rating for all the "mature" content in the game, but it managed to just squeak by with that. Now that there's this in the game, the game has pushed well beyond into an AO - Adults Only game, and I don't believe there's been an AO game to date since the ESRB formed.

      It's also a "big deal" because Rockstar lied about the content being in the game at all, so this it's possible this could lead to criminal charges brought forth against the company and it'
      • For one, it's not in the game. For two, modding the game to enable this feature is unlawful. For three, they didn't lie, these self appointed "experts" just don't understand the press release or are deliberately misinterpreting it to accuse Rockstar of lying. Not to mention the fact that the game was rated MA, not M and there have indeed been AO rated games since ESRB was formed. Are we done now?
        • For one, it's not in the game. For two, modding the game to enable this feature is unlawful.

          Wrong on both counts. It sounds like an Easter Egg not a mod: "cannot be accessed without entering a long string of cheat codes, and takes several hours of effort to access".

          That is a big deal and quite idiotic of them. All copies of the game could be pulled from retail stores and a new manufacturing run could be required. That is a major financial mistake, someone should be fired, maybe even sued, by the pub
          • Everyone is using such loaded words to describe this.

            Yes, it exists within the code of the game. However, it is DISABLED. Without modifying the game in an unintended way (save game modification) it is inacessable. The cheat codes they are talking about are using game enhancement devices, not controller codes.

            The question is.. is it in the 'game' if it's not actually part of the game like that? is Crocomire in Metroid Zero Mission? Is a placeholer model that ended up being sent with the full version t
            • See, the thing is: the rating is supposed to represent what a person would experience playing the game. The sex scenes are NOT what a person would experience playing the game, unless you use the hot coffee mod to do it on purpose, after finding out about it.

              You're partially right, -these- sex scenes are not what a person would experience playing the game, but there are a couple ..'sexUAL" scenes, and foro that they hav in the Mature label "Strong Sexual Content" ... whether it needs to be unlocked or not,
          • It sounds like an Easter Egg not a mod: "cannot be accessed without entering a long string of cheat codes, and takes several hours of effort to access".

            That's what it sounded to me, too, so I read TFA. It's not a long string of cheat codes, it's manipulation of internal variables using Action Replay, ie an external tool. In my eyes, that makes all the difference.
      • Adults Only game, and I don't believe there's been an AO game to date since the ESRB formed.

        There are 18 games with an AO [esrb.org] rating.

          • Lied in court while under oath

            Ok, moron, since this is such a big deal to you, maybe it would help if you actually knew what happened?

            At one point, while under oath, Clinton was asked, basically, "have you had sexual relations with Lewinsky?" To this he responded, "please define sexual relations?" The prosecution, already knowing FULL WELL about the BJ, specifically left oral sex off of the list when defining 'sexual relations.' Clinton took the bait and said, TRUTHFULLY, AS DEFINED BY THE PROSECUTION, "No, I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

            Later on, it was proven that Clinton did, indeed receive a BJ from Lewinsky. BUT HE NEVER CLAIMED THAT HE DIDN'T, AS DEFINED BY THE PROSECUTION.

            Fortunately, most morons don't look into the whole background of the case, and don't understand exactly how the whole thing happened. "omg he had sexxorz in teh oval office and he said he didnt!" So the prosecution got exactly what they wanted: it appeared that they had caught Clinton lying. After millions of dollars worth of investigation, being unable to turn up anything useful against him, ALL THEY COULD DO WAS TRICK HIM INTO APPEARING TO LIE UNDER OATH.

            Here's the real story: Clinton DID NOT LIE. PERIOD. Starr just changed definitions around on him to make it appear that he did.

            Your failure to understand this is very dangerous. No citizen should be so easily manipulated by lawyer-types into believing what the lawyer wants them to believe.

            I apologize for the caps. I get sick of straightening people out on this -- not that most of them listen, because they prefer to believe that he lied anyway.

            --Jeremy
            • Ok, moron, since this is such a big deal to you, maybe it would help if you actually knew what happened?

              There is a little problem with your rant. He admitted he lied, or do you consider "false testimony" and "a lie" to be different things. That would be classic if you do though.

              "(CBS) Overcoming his earlier defiance, President Clinton on Friday acknowledged that he gave false testimony in the Monica Lewinsky scandal, just as prosecutors have contended. Mr. Clinton's admission in a deal with Independent Counsel Robert Ray brings an apparent end to the legal woes that have plagued his presidency and spare him from a possible criminal indictment after he leaves office."

              http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/01/19/politics /main265539.shtml [cbsnews.com]

              Your failure to understand this is very dangerous. No citizen should be so easily manipulated by lawyer-types into believing what the lawyer wants them to believe.

              And when you bought into the spin that "false testimony" and "a lie" are not the same that was not manipulation? Open your eyes, no president should be allowed to lie to the court, oh, excuse me, give false testimony to the court. Not even the sympathetic ones you like. That is a line that should not be crossed, its too dangerous.
            • You said: ...Here's the real story: Clinton DID NOT LIE. PERIOD...I apologize for the caps. I get sick of straightening people out on this -- not that most of them listen, because they prefer to believe that he lied anyway...

              Bill Clinton said: "I tried to walk a fine line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely, but I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish this goal and am certain my responses to questions about Ms. Lewinsky were false," [cnn.com]

              But the REALLY sad thing about this is your defense of it, and your rabid attack on others. Partisian politics is killing this country. Clinton lied. He, in his own testimony admits he was trying to circumvent the truth without technically breaking the law, because that would have been *OK*. To me trying to circumvent the truth is just as bad.

              I also believe that there was disinformation on Iraq. I believe Karl Rove should be fired and then prosecuted. I believe in punishing the guilty whether they share my political ideology or not. What bothers me the most about American politics today is the republicans and democrats who blindly follow their leaders and then further the lies of their party line by repeating them (as you have done).

              So, I would ask you (and everyone) to turn down the rhetoric (...Your failure to understand this is very dangerous. No citizen should be so easily manipulated...) and instead encourage everyone to seek the truth. Every individual should be allowed to interpret the truth as they see fit -- but we should all be zealots for making sure that the truth is actually known.

              • Actually, it's more a question of "is it appropriate for someone to obfuscate when they are they subject of a blatant witch hunt." Obviously not legal, but is it ethical?

                Keep in mind that a standing president can't be called as a defendant. How do you think, exactly, that Clinton, therefore, was able to be put in a position to lie under oath? Answer: He wasn't a defendant, he was subpeona'd for a different matter.

                The real core of this is, while probably he shouldn't have lied, he really should never

    • When you have sex, baby Jesus cries.
    • but the second sex comes in to the picture - it's horrible and it kills little baby angels!

      Holy shit, do you live in a cave or something? The anger didn't start with the HotCoffee stuff. The game has pissed off alot of people ever since it came out.

      How could you miss all the angry parents and politicians who have complained about every single GTA release for months on end?
      • The best thing it could accomplish is to point out how shitty of a rating system the ESRB is, and maybe get it replaced with a good one.

        We had the "good one". The software industry developed several game rating systems in response to the the Video Game Rating Act of 1994. The two major ones were the familiar ESRB rating system and another rating system developed by the Recreational Software Advisory Council (RSAC).

        The RSAC system is the one you describe that used the thermometer style markings. Th

  • From TFA:
    To prove or disprove rumors that the PS2 San Andreas contains a sexually graphic minigame, GameSpot decided to test the cheat codes circulating around the Web on a sealed, first-edition copy of San Andreas.
    ... right.

    Wankers.

  • Rockstar should have told the truth right away... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by holiggan (522846) on Saturday July 16 2005, @07:46AM (#13080697)
    ...instead of hidding behind the "hacker boogeyman". Now they made matters worst for themselves, since everyone will look at them as liars...

    The question here is not the (stupid and harmless) "sex" content that the game might have, the question is that Rockstar lied, plain and simple.

    It's very bad that Rockstar didn't had the balls to just say that the content was there, they tryed to duck out and now they are in a worst situation...

    Way to go, Rockstar... we want the games industry to be seen as mature and respectfull and you pull an 15-year-old stunt on us all. Shame on you...

    • Bah, it's just people misinterpreting their press release. When they say the "content" wasn't in GTA they mean the minigame wasn't enabled.
    • You cannot say for sure whether they lied or not. It could very well be a single coder/designer who lied. They could have coded the minigame and hidden it. And as the rest of the rockstar development knew, it was just some left over animations. Code in a game is not like code for apps. It is very messy, laced with old, unused code. The ability to track and remove this unused code is very difficult, especially with a game as large as GTA. It could also be that they really did believe that the game was remove
      • You got a point, but the image that will get across is that they lied, period. What do you think that the media or the politics will say? "Eh, it's not their fault, you see, the game making process is very complex blablabla"...

        They are going to jump on Rockstar all over, and on top of all the shit that they already say about Rockstar, they'll add "and they lied to protect themselves!"

        It's too easy a target to pickup on, I don't think that the politics and the media will overlook it.

        I just think that Ro

    • I'll save you time. Here's Rockstar's statement [pro-g.co.uk].

      Every single time, Rockstar stated, "altering the game's source code". They never said the content wasn't in there. That was a complete misinterpretation of their statement.

      What they said was the equivalent of saying, "We did not distribute porn to kids. The claims that we did were the equivalent of a bunch of guys who broke a window, climbed in to our locked house, raided every drawer and closet, finally found our safe, spent hours cracking it, and finally

  • Rockstar should release it (Score:5, Interesting)

    by QuantumG (50515) <qg@biodome.org> on Saturday July 16 2005, @08:01AM (#13080747) Homepage Journal
    After all this great press coverage, Rockstar should box up the Hot Coffee mod, slap an AO rating on it, and put it on store shelves. Maybe even make the minigame a little more playable. That'll show them "think of the children" wankers how it is. Spread the message: We don't expect your kids to play it, we don't want your kids to play it, the game is for adults.
    • After all this great press coverage, Rockstar should box up the Hot Coffee mod, slap an AO rating on it, and put it on store shelves. Maybe even make the minigame a little more playable. That'll show them "think of the children" wankers how it is.

      The middle class, "think of the children" wankers, as you call them, are a retailer's core market. They are politically aware, and politically potent. They have the power to grind Rockstar into pulp anytime they chose.

  • From Rockstar:
    hackers created the 'hot coffee' modification by disassembling and then combining, recompiling and altering the game's source code.
    I don't see how what Rockstar said "goes against" what the modder said. Rockstar doesn't say that the modder added content, they said he combined, recompiled, and altered the game's source, which is what you would need to do to make the game take an alternate path into the mini-game.
      • I think everybody (at least on Slashdot) has read about this long enough to have a decent grasp of the problem. I don't see why people have to keep using hyperbole to argue about the basic technical issues. The possibilities are:
        1. the user only had to type in a cheatcode
        2. like the Excel easter-egg, the user has to do an obscure series of steps to unlock the mini-game, and the first person to discover the obscure steps probably had to go to a significant amount of effort to discover them (or have inside kn

      • Re:As I said in the last article... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Deagol (323173) on Saturday July 16 2005, @11:27AM (#13081599) Homepage
        You're shittin' us, right?

        The best modders are as talented as professional programmers (though those two groups aren't mutually exclusive). I *still* find the old Doom mod "Aliens TC" to be one of the best suspense gaming experiences ever produced (the original Unreal was close). Admittedly, I haven't purchased a retail game since Quake II, but having tried various demos and watching peers play games, I stand by my opinion.

  • R Rated Movie more revealing (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Xian97 (714198) on Saturday July 16 2005, @08:05AM (#13080765)
    The game has a M rating in the US which is supposed to mean that it's to be played by 17 year olds and above. R Rated movies are the same, 17 and above, but are much more revealing than the pixelated scene in GTA. The question comes down to why the outrage over GTA but not a late night movie on Cinemax? I think it is because people still associate games with children, even if it is an adult themed game. Some children will get their hands on the game, just as some will be watching R rated movies. That's up to the parents to monitor.

    Where Rockstar can be found at fault is for not including that scene to be rated by the ESRB. They submitted it for ratings and were supposed to reveal everything for review.
        • So 17 year olds cant handle it, but 18 year olds can?

          All this has proved is how shitty the ESRB rating system is. It's not the system the industry wanted it was forced on it by the government.

          The government mandated a ratings system as a result of games like Mortal Kombat, so that parents would have an idea of the content of a game before determining if it was appropriate for their kids. This was a GOOD idea. The government said "create your own rating system, or we will create one for you."

          I saw th

          • > The government mandated a ratings system as a result of games like Mortal Kombat

            ESRB ratings are absolutely "voluntary". Industry pressure effectively has the force of law, but no one can be legally prohibited from selling their game for not submitting it to ratings.

            The same goes for MPAA ratings on movies. Lots of indie flicks never get rated, and even the occasional mass market release goes through without rating. It doesn't seem to affect marketability these days.

          • I saw the proposal, and it looked like 4 or 5 thermometers indicating things like how much violence, sexuality, swearing was in the game. There was nothing there that indicated an "age", you just got a clear indicator of the content and then as a parent you could decide if it was appropriate.

            The government rejected it!

            First: the government did not "mandate" or "reject" any rating system. It was created by the ESRB, a organization founded by video game companies. It became a de facto standard, no

  • Rockstar was not untruthful (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PhotoBoy (684898) on Saturday July 16 2005, @08:27AM (#13080832)
    "This essentially means that Rockstar was untruthful when it previously stated the content was added by a modder"

    If you carefully re-read the statement by Rockstar again you will see it is very cleverly worded to point the blame at the people who released the mod while avoiding actually admitting the content was theirs. They were not untruthful, they were just assisted by some very expensive lawyers in preparing a statement that makes it look like it's not their fault without outright lying. Closer inspection shows they do not deny it.

    I can't understand why they tried taking that tack in the first place though. In my post here [slashdot.org] I did a simple binary comparison of the mod's files to the originals and found only a few bytes difference. It wouldn't take long for anyone to work out that the content is theirs.

    A far better route to have taken IMHO is to just admit that it was a feature they removed and that they apologise for any upset caused as they did not think anyone would find it and unlock it.

    At the end of the day when the lawsuits start coming in, I think the crux of Rockstar's argument has to be that to access the sex game you have to download the mod which alters the game's files. This was never intended by Rockstar and therefore the responsibility lies with the person who applied the mod to exercise judgement. And if they are not mature enough to do this, their parents should be monitoring their computing activites anyway.
    • >This was never intended by Rockstar and therefore the responsibility lies with the person who applied the mod to exercise judgement. And if they are not mature enough to do this, their parents should be monitoring their computing activites anyway.

      Oh please, gimme a break. Rockstar deliberately left this in for someone to find. It's more than natural that somebody would stumble upon it, given the game mod community that's all over the PC versions of GTA and works better than Rockstar's own hyping mach

  • Easier Way to Prove (Score:3, Informative)

    by prezkennedy.org (786501) on Saturday July 16 2005, @10:08AM (#13081219) Homepage Journal
    All you have to do in order to prove this content wasn't actually added by the mod is to take a savegame from GTA: San Andreas with the "Hot Coffee" mod installed and run it on an install of San Andreas that doesn't have the mod installed. You'll notice the sex scenes are still in the game even though it isn't modded. I mentioned this awhile ago... on my own website [prezkennedy.org]

  • SimCopter... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Wilson_6500 (896824) on Saturday July 16 2005, @07:06PM (#13084118)
    I know that it wasn't quite as explicit, but does anyone remember that one version of SimCopter that had the little "boxer-clad men run around kissing" feature? Why didn't we hear such an uproar about that?
    • You mean if you illegally reverse engineer the DVD to find some material that was accidentally left on it and then pass a program around the Internet that lets other people get access to that material I'd be in trouble for not ensuring that you wouldn't break the law and access the material that I had deliberately made sure you couldn't access for the purposes of rating? You're fuckin' kiding right?
        • >>Next, you have to make the argument that you are safe at home no matter what illicit content can be found on a Rockstar disk, so long at is accessible only through a third-party mod.

          If you don't want to play the Hot Coffee mod, it's not going to download itself and surprise you the next time you go play GTA. If you're worried about kids getting it, well, if you can't figure out how to prevent them from getting the mod then they've probably seen WAY to much porn for it to matter then.
    • first of all, i have played the mod, i wanted to find out what all the crap was about, and i found nothing that the ESRB would have classified as AO, the content is obviously well within the M rating(not to mention being a shitty minigame that we should all be thankful requires more work to access than its worth)

      this isn't about "saving the children", this is about Political bolstering. Clinton is using this little debackle to put her name in the limelight so that millions of non-gamers that have no idea

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.