Graftark Tech enthusiast and all around nerd/geek.

‘Hot Coffee’

It has been a while now since the whole 'Hot Coffee' debate has flared up and I figure it is about time that I chime in with my opinion. First of all GTA: San Andreas originally hit the shelves with a rating of M (M = Mature, for audiences of 17+), this rating fit the shipped game perfectly. The game had not included, as part of the product, this sexual content that has spawned this debacle. Now this game, prior to activating the extra content, included very graphic depictions of murder as well as other sexually charged situations and ridiculously vulgar language.
   Now it's my opinion that the ESRB puts ratings on games with the intentions that the guidelines would be followed. People who have bought this game for children under the age restriction of 17 have effectively taken the responsibility of exposing these children to the game content into their own hands. This means that Rock Star Games cannot be held responsible for young ones playing the game. Activating any content not included in the game as it is shipped and meant to be played is a modification that the one who activates that modification has to take responsibility for. Now the game has had the ESRB rating increased to an AO (Adults Only), this is a completely acceptable decision. With this AO rating the whole issue should be dropped, apparently this has given rise to whole new spat of game bashing.
   Critics would have you believe that video games are destroying the moral fabric of the American people, and people around the world. It surprises me that Hillary Clinton has chosen to spearhead the issue, given that there's a lot of rumors flying around that she'd be making a bid for the presidency. This could very well prove to be a poll killer, now there are a lot people who like the idea of not taking the resposibility for screening the games their children play but I believe that the amount of people in the younger demographic who will be voting for their first, second or third times will remember this. I have no reservations in saying that I voted democratic and I like to believe that a majority of gamers actually feel the same way. I remember when Lieberman(sp?) ran with a campaign against games, now I wouldn't give him a second thought.
   When you boil this issue down to it's essential components you arrive at the conclusion that people want even less to do with their children than ever and want the government to take care of them, something we all know them to do poorly, while putting limitations on developer's rights protected by the first amendment. This is a travesty, one that I fear could help the Patriot Act be reinstated (Crap, I just read that it was reinstated... morons). Now, before anyone builds a case against games not being covered by first amendment rights keep in mind that one could state the GTA:San Andreas could most certainly be seen as a relevant statement about life in low-income America. It's an extremely similar portrayal of that kind of life that occurs all the time on the news, television and movies.