This is true 100%. In 7th grade my school had me read 'Lord of the Flies'. That book was way more jacked than just about any video game I have ever played yet it was approved of by a public school. It is interesting how that works.

A book doesn't labor to create visuals either.

Nor is there any concealing its content.

If you are going to do polygon porn, at least admit it, full frontal. (sorry, had to put it that way).

That's always the cost of doing business in the coolest new media. In the 1920's, it was jazz music on the radio; in the 1950's, it was adult comics; in the 1980s to today it was rap; in the 1990s and 2000s, it was video games. If you look at the history of those artists who have been chosen for abuse by the establishment over the years, you'll see that Houser is in some excellent company.

Hot Coffee also gave them a lot of free publicity and brought some new customers on board.

I remember reading some critiques of Ian Fleming Bond novels from the 50's not long ago, and the arguments about they being the embodiment of the downfall of morality in the society (being full of violence, sex, sadism and very little restraint) made me remember the same sort of arguments that were being used at Rockstar by then.

The self-appointed arbiters of cultural value will always judge their hipocritical, self-centered, self-serving judgements as they see fit, and there always be those to side with them, for that is the easiest thing to do.

(though Rockstar, admittely, profited immensily from the controversy surrounding and pouring from gta, so there's a mutual-feeding relationship for ya)

I still don't get why modern society, especially in America, demonize sex so much.

Heads blowing off in an explosion of blood and brain - Kinda suitable for kids
Sex no matter how watered down and just faintly hinted - Immediate censorship.

Nah, if there was a rating system for books and some writer managed to hide content to achieve a more commercially viable rating than they should have had, there'd be this type of outcome as well.

Also, an author probably would have had the stones to keep the content in the game (at least the PC version) rather than be censored. Just sayin.

I think the major factor was the non-disclosure to the ESRB. Not that I think Rockstar is really a fault though. They DID remove the code from the game allowing the mini-game to be activated. The only thing we/they can really do is learn from this debacle is to be careful with the content left in a game's code. Even if we don't think anyone will see it, someone might.

You know, I'm really surprised that somebody hasn't yet trotted out the old, idiotic argument about the hypocrisy of tolerating violent content and repressing sexual content. I guess it was referred to in a roundabout way by the 'Lord of the Flies' comments, and I'm sure it's one of the things Leonardo is thinking of with his inane "hypocritical, self-centered, self-serving judgements", but remarkably - it hasn't been mentioned directly yet.

So, why don't I pre-emptively shoot down down this argument before it comes up? ;)

We treat violence very differently to sex because they are, in fact, very different. Very few people would object to having an audience when beating someone up. On the other hand, very few people would not object to having an audience during sex. To put it simply, violence is very, very much in the public sphere of life, and sex is extremely, extremely private. And this is not because someone has arbitrarily ("hypocritically, self-centeredly, self-servingly...") made such a decision, but because it it something that almost all human beings fully agree on. The overwhelmingly vast majority of the human race does not have a problem with some degree of violence on screen, while automatically turning their heads away when seeing... not even sex, most people turn away seeing a couple kissing passionately. We feel instinctively that we have no right to watch.

Also, for the record - Dan Houser must have missed the memo about the uproar "Fifty Shades of Gray" has caused. A book that treats sex as trivially and despicably as GTA San Andreas got the exact same reaction. It's not a "we're a poor, repressed new medium" thing. San Andreas crossed a line that no medium is allowed to cross without backlash.

In my opinion not having the content there that's wrong, it's concealing its existence from authorities and customers. The fact that it was not easily accessible makes no difference - it existed, was essentially usable, and was being distributed to millions of people without their (or their legal guardians') knowledge.

What happened when "Hot Coffee" was found in the UK? Absolutely nothing. The game was still well within the 18 rating and there was no controversy.

There is definitely an issue in America with sex in video games. Fahrenheit (know as Indigo Prophecy in the US) had a very similar interactive sex scene that was removed from the American version of the game but included in the European version. It is very much a cultural thing.

just silly, a game as violence and nasty as this, and for people to get in an uproar because the character may get naked and make love? Tells us more about how messed up as a society we are then anything else.

IE. Killing and senseless slaughter deemed OK, showing physical affection however.. now. now you've crossed a line. Ridiculous