They've got strong legal ground, Rockstar doesn't have the moral upper hand after winning a suit against them brought for similar reasons and games are expensive to develop, so I really doubt the game itself was altered.

Yeah, this person has a bright future at R*.

Well, someone's always a critic..

Did I hear the pot calling the kettle black?

You'd think a lawyer for R* would have more important things to do with their time, like counting the giant stacks of cash that just lay around the R* offices.

I thought Grand Theft Walrus was funnier.

I hope the change they were forced to make was to rename that level/section/whatever. "Grand Theft Scratchy" was just stupid and lazy.

Also, why is Jack Thompson in the tags? This has nothing to do with him at all.

Yeah, I'm not sure this is Rockstar's fault here. It could have been someone involved with the convention (parody or not, that poster has a severed limb and a stabbed out eye) who thought it was in poor taste for the convention floor.

Everything I've been seeing on this Simpsons game actually has me intrigued. It might be worth a purchase.

Wow aren't they hypocrites

Can anyone confirm that the game will be altered?

The Simpsons game is pretty much a parody of an array of games including God of War (God of Wharf) and Everquest (Neverquest). Are these publishers/developers also upset?

@Rockstar:
Haw-Haw! You're embarassed!

You guys are amazing.

You read one story that references another story which has no quotes from a Rockstar official, no quotes from a Rockstar press release, no "no comment" from Rockstar, not even a "Rockstar refused to comment"... and you take it as gospel.

How hard is it for someone from the gamer press to pick up a phone, call Rockstar and ask for a comment from one of its bigwigs or PR people?
Nah, why bother. It's easier to print a rumor.

Congrats to EA and Rizzer for duping CVG and, by extension, GamePolitics.
When someone finds a CREDIBLE source that has ANY quote or decline-to-quote from Rockstar concerning this story, let me know.

I won't be holding my breath.

This is funny.

If, and only if this is true, then Rockstar is stupid, especially after the Jack Thompson BS, but thats only if its true.

Arguably hypocritical? I'd say it full well is!

Hey GPers,

I'm currently seeking comment from Rockstar. Nothing so far but I’ll keep you all posted.


Andrew Eisen

Odd? No it's not odd at all. The people who run Rockstar are hypocrites, and Strauss Zelnick is hypocrite in chief. Glad to see the inconvenient truth is seeping through even to gamers.

Hoo-ah?

@jack thompson, attorney

The article has to tdo with Rockstar, NOT Take Two. Learn to read.

Also, I think any game company would realize that YOU helping them with a case against of all places, Microsoft is professional suicide. Tell us again, how many times have you succeeded, can you name even one case?

I thought not.

kurisu7885 -

What's the difference? Rockstar is just a development studio owned by Take-Two.

Also, he's going to cite the time he played a large role in getting Howard Stern taken off the air. That's not really an insignificant thing, but it doesn't really say anything about his ability to fight against the Constitution (he can't win).

Ahh yes, John Bruce "Jack - What Constitution?" Thompson.

:D

It's just too easy!

~Otaku-Man

@OtakuMan

No no.

"jack thompson, constitutionally protected and you're not."

XD

Is that the real Jack Thompson? I thought he wasn't going to speak to GP ever again (for the nth time).

I think he may have commented here just because his name's in the tag, but I could be wrong.

Anyway. Jack? What I say in response to that is:

Good luck.

I mean it. *If* Microsoft (or any other game company) is acting inappropriately, and *if* this is verifiable, and *if* it's something noteworthy... then sure, I think the public should know about it.

But please note we've yet to see any verification on the original article you've responded to. Did Rockstar complain to the EA? We don't know for sure. Did the details make it noteworthy? Also unknown. ("Please take down that one poster" is not, by the way; that may reflect an individual's decision at the time, and not company policy.) All we know is that an alleged 'someone' requested that a poster be taken down.

But sure, even if it comes from someone as famously biased as you, the truth is important. The only thing that concerns me is that you historically have played fast and loose with the facts, to put it kindly; be prepared for serious examination of whatever 'truth' you put forward.

"I’ve just been contacted by a video game industry company which has offered to blow the whistle on Microsoft and others regarding the inner workings of the video game industry. This company has asked for my assistance.

What do you think I told this person?

Jack Thompson"

Ummm.... what the hell are you trying to say? I figured you wouldn't want any help from the 'evil, Manchurian-raising' video game industry in 'taking down' Microsoft?

1. What does this have to do with Rockstar (if you could READ you could see that THEY are the subject of this article and not Take Two.)

2. Why are you even here? Shouldn't you be preparing for your important, make-or-break hearing tomorrow? Of course not, because you're a hack with no life who google's his name and has a man-crush on someone half his age, and looks up gay porn in his spare time aside from that, and otherwise doesn't give two shits about his own career.

//I’ve just been contacted by a video game industry company which has offered to blow the whistle on Microsoft and others regarding the inner workings of the video game industry. This company has asked for my assistance.

What do you think I told this person?

Jack Thompson //


...What the hell does that have to do with anything?! Jack, go get a life outside your office (or trash bin, whatever you work in), and get an actual job. If you think the world's going to hell, then let it go to hell, just shut up, no one likes you!

Anything that was taken down or removed would only have been done out of courtesy because parody is protected by law as far as infringement purposes.

Uh, so let me get this straight.

You DON'T know whether it was just the poster or the entire level
You DON'T know if it was anyone actually from R*

Rather poor form people

I don't think "upset" means the same as what it means when Jack Thompson is upset, i.e., legal lawsuits. I think it was just one or two people were upset with it--but that's all the farther was going to go.

[...] Coming Eventually from DeviateSoft « World Series Champions ‘07 WHAT?! Spooky Time October 30th, 2007 So tomorrow is Halloween. And with it, another controversial Rockstar game.You know I gotta give these guys a lot of credit for having the thick skin they do (for the most part). Rumors say Manhunt 2 is 99% what it was before… although that’s obviously not quite good enough. GameSpy has apparently given the game a mediocre rating. Guess those fade-out deaths really just sugarcoat the game, which is what I was afraid of. What irritates me, however, is how little the anti-game critics know about the game itself. For example, they continue to say that it is unknown what Rockstar did to tone down the game. As they say on 4chan, lurk moar. The answers are all there. No more testicles being chopped off. An unsatisfying blur and darkening effect on deaths. And this information was released a month and a half ago. [...]