Can releasing AO games be so complicated?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for greenghost123
greenghost123

570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 greenghost123
Member since 2007 • 570 Posts
You know I always figured they could just release it on the PSN/XBLA/Direct to drive services yet no developers have taken this oppurtunity. Could it be from some other legal online distribution policies for AO games, media backlash, or they just don't think it'll sell? I'd like to see GTA 4 in it's full glory, as the developers always wanted it to without the influence of legal elements.
Avatar image for UpInFlames
UpInFlames

13301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 41

User Lists: 0

#2 UpInFlames
Member since 2004 • 13301 Posts

Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo do not allow AO rated games on their consoles, although laughably they do allow these exact same games outside of North America. :roll: So it's not only complicated, it's impossible at this point.

I don't understand where you get the idea that Grand Theft Auto IV is being censored.

Avatar image for XaosII
XaosII

16705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 XaosII
Member since 2003 • 16705 Posts
PSN/XBL/Direct are all services provided by the head company. They can stilldictate the content that is available there. They will just decline any game of that nature to be hosted on their services.
Avatar image for greenghost123
greenghost123

570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 greenghost123
Member since 2007 • 570 Posts

Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo do not allow AO rated games on their consoles, although laughably they do allow these exact same games outside of North America. :roll: So it's not only complicated, it's impossible at this point.

I don't understand where you get the idea that Grand Theft Auto IV is being censored.

UpInFlames

I can't believe I forgot that policy by Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft. Anyways that hidden Hot Coffee mini-game should be some proof that the creators wanted the game to be more graphic than it was. Well now that the whole incident has cooled down (oh yes, pun intended)

I'm sure North is much more cautious what with the media breathing down their neck, I'm sure if there wasn't any type of pressure from anyone then North would most likely have a more explicit game in the making. But I'm speculating at the moment, the game hasn't been released so we'll see what they can get away without crossing the AO area.

Well at least there is hope for PC gaming, to bad the only people taking advantage of this are skinheads, neo-nazis, and Klansmen.

Avatar image for furqan2006
furqan2006

384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 furqan2006
Member since 2006 • 384 Posts

Just wait for God of war 3. It's going to be super gory more gory than Gears of War.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#6 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

UpInFlames covered the main point but there is one I wanted to address that I always do when this point about the AO rating comes up.

AO means "adults only." There is a stigma attached to it that it makes it mean "pornographic" and not just "for adults only." One of the major problems with the ESRB system is the fact they have two ratings, each separated by a single year. "M" is for 17+ and "AO" is for 18+. This really makes no sense because someone who is 17 is most likely going to be of the same intellectual maturity level as someone who is only a year older.

What I think the ESRB should do (aside from launching a US-wide education campaign for the stupid parents out there who think games are for kids and kids only) is reform the rating system. They need to remove these stupid ratings. What is the "E10+" for? that is a few years beneath T and those games contain maybe slightly more realistic cartoon violence or harsher language ("damn" instead of "darn").

Then comes the "M" and the "AO." Both should be dumped and replaced with a single rating that doesn't make it seem as if the game is pornographic but also implies that the game is intended for an adult audience (and PROVE that games are not just for kids)... which would mean 18 years or older. Then on top of that, bring in a new rating of "X" or "XXX" that shows clearly that a game is pornographic in nature and not intended to be more than pixelated nudity or simulated sex.

So then you would have these ratings:

EC ~ For young children
E ~ For everyone
T ~ Not for everyone, children over 12/13
A ~ For adults only, 18+
X ~ Pornographic "game"

That way there would be no question that some games are NOT intended for children and we can avoid having things like the most recent Mass Effect scandal where these morons on FOX think that because the game is rated M and is a "game" it is meant for kids. I think one of the problems with the "M" rating is the word "mature." People might think that it means "for mature kids" and completely ignore the age level and content labelled clearly on the box.

I would go on and on and on about how I think the ESRB is flawed but I think I covered it as best I could in the shortest amount of space possible.

Avatar image for greenghost123
greenghost123

570

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 greenghost123
Member since 2007 • 570 Posts

UpInFlames covered the main point but there is one I wanted to address that I always do when this point about the AO rating comes up.

AO means "adults only." There is a stigma attached to it that it makes it mean "pornographic" and not just "for adults only." One of the major problems with the ESRB system is the fact they have two ratings, each separated by a single year. "M" is for 17+ and "AO" is for 18+. This really makes no sense because someone who is 17 is most likely going to be of the same intellectual maturity level as someone who is only a year older.

What I think the ESRB should do (aside from launching a US-wide education campaign for the stupid parents out there who think games are for kids and kids only) is reform the rating system. They need to remove these stupid ratings. What is the "E10+" for? that is a few years beneath T and those games contain maybe slightly more realistic cartoon violence or harsher language ("damn" instead of "darn").

Then comes the "M" and the "AO." Both should be dumped and replaced with a single rating that doesn't make it seem as if the game is pornographic but also implies that the game is intended for an adult audience (and PROVE that games are not just for kids)... which would mean 18 years or older. Then on top of that, bring in a new rating of "X" or "XXX" that shows clearly that a game is pornographic in nature and not intended to be more than pixelated nudity or simulated sex.

So then you would have these ratings:

EC ~ For young children
E ~ For everyone
T ~ Not for everyone, children over 12/13
A ~ For adults only, 18+
X ~ Pornographic "game"

That way there would be no question that some games are NOT intended for children and we can avoid having things like the most recent Mass Effect scandal where these morons on FOX think that because the game is rated M and is a "game" it is meant for kids. I think one of the problems with the "M" rating is the word "mature." People might think that it means "for mature kids" and completely ignore the age level and content labelled clearly on the box.

I would go on and on and on about how I think the ESRB is flawed but I think I covered it as best I could in the shortest amount of space possible.

foxhound_fox

Meh. I don't think the A/X thing is neccesary, yes it is clear to the parents that this is not for kids (since most of them were born in the 60's/70's, they'll know what it means) but at the same time it's uneccesary, unless you mean a game solely concentrated on pornography.