Rockstar's Houser Expects GTA IV Controversy

Rockstar's Houser Expects GTA IV Controversy

February 4, 2008
Rockstar VP Dan Houser (left) expects Grand Theft Auto IV to be controversial when it launches on April 29th.

No surprise there.

Houser told the Associated Press:
I expect [controversy] because we’ve had so much of it in the past. I wish people would treat video games the same as other media. They seem to not want to do that for reasons that I don’t understand. It’s a convenient enemy for people.

Indeed, the GTA series has long been the lightning rod for watchdogs of game content. Frequent Rockstar critic Jack Thompson has already indicated that he is gearing up to take on GTA IV:
Thompson will, in the days and weeks ahead, be contacting state and federal officials to stop the improper sales of Grand Theft Auto IV to anyone under seventeen years of age...

Comments

And in other news, the sun rose in the east today.

Of course there is going to be controversy, everything Rockstar outs out gets attacked by all the self-appointed watchdog groups. I think someone even had a problem with Table Tennis.

This is what's going to happen; Jack and the Fruit Loop Brigade will release reports and pres releases about how awful GTA IV is without ever having played it. Much of what they say will be complete bollocks (of the "you get points for killing cops" variety, but also expect at least one "You can recreate 9-11" in there), but there wil be just enough truth that the mainstream media will latch onto it.

The medi will drag out Thompson and/or other members of the Fruit Loop Brigade to come on and talk about how awful this game (and games in general) are. If anyone who is pro-game is allowed a voice they will be picked for their inability to speak well, they will be mocked, or they will just not be allowed to speak. One has to remember that mainstream media dislikes video games since if you are playing a video game, you are probably not watching their network.

One or two stores, seeking to get in on that free press, will announce that they will not carry the game, but most stores will. The game will sell out pretty much everywhere on the first day, and the stores that so proudly trumpeted that they will not carry the game will quietly start carrying it once they realize how much they lost out on in sales.
Why is it that everyone here thinks rockstar always tries to make games as controversial as possible? People play the GTA games, they love them, they ask Rockstar for sequels and Rockstar produces them, it's basic aspects of the game industry. I suppose that if the Final Fantasy series was controversial you'd accuse the makers of trying to leech off controversy every time they make a sequel.

Really if Rockstar wanted to make this game as controversial as possible then there was much, much more things they could've done, tons of things involving 9/11 spring to mind immediately. And of course if Rockstar didn't want to do that then the simple addition of children as pedestrians would be more than enough (plus they could write it off as simply being more realistic, since it be kinda hard to live in a city the size of New York and never see children in the street).

Most of the controversy around Grand Theft Auto is undeserved, exaggerated and/or down right Bullshit.

Hot Coffe
Encouraging people to kill cops (or prostitutes)
Teaches people to kill
The Vice City "Kill all haitans" mumbo jumbo.

The only media-generated controversy that can even remotely be called well-deserved is that the game is very violent and sexual, but that shouldn't be an issue since it's rated appropriately.
same old same old.
so, when everyone realizes there are no improper sales to children, what's Jack going to do with the other 245 days in the year?
Slow news day?
I wonder if Hack Thompson is ever going to target some other game.

"Gran Turismo, which brands itself as The Real Driving Simulator, is in fact that. Only, it is a street racing simulator. It teaches children how to run over pedestrians, evade pursuits, bump other drivers and drive at high speeds. Not to mention. If the player can beat all the times in time trial mode, then the player is treated to a sex game even worse than GTA and Bully combined! And even worse! It teaches that nothing happens to you if you crash! Think of all the children who would go street racing and then kill both themselves and some innocent bystander by crashing into them and into a wall! This is horrible!"

And then everyone would laugh at Jack Thompson, except for a few morons who'd view this as truth for some reason.
I don't blame him.
Seems repetitive, I mean...We already sort of know that.
"I expect [controversy]..."

Uh, no shit.
"Indeed, the GTA series has long been the lightning rod for watchdogs of game content."

...gta is always attacked because they make it so damn easy to make it look bad,R* uses the hype and the fact that with old lawyers from miami dont like it to propel their sales.

Rockstar is a huge publicity whore if one of their games dosent piss off jack they dont bother finishing it

long story short millions of copys will be sold and R* will save money on ads because jack thompson is stupid and likes playing into peoples hands.

If R* didnt exist a large sum of the controversy surronding videogames would vanish with it
(not all,as some idiots would nitpick other games example=mass effect)
damn,right when they were running out of steam too
"Thompson will, in the days and weeks ahead, be contacting state and federal officials to stop the improper sales of Grand Theft Auto IV to anyone under seventeen years of age…"

Good! the whole lever people are using on stopping video games is that they're being sold to unnacompanied children/teens below the recommended rating, which is against store policy.

if retailers can reach an acceptable level of enforcement (i personaly would like to see 95%+) then the 'protect the children' argument will be over, because we'll all be doing our part to ensure it, whilst not infringing on parental rights on the matter (hence my use of the word unaccompanied)
Mr Houser, I have prepared what I think is an appropriate response to your prediction.

No shit/
SSDD
Really? GTA, controversy? Nah!

Although it's pretty funny at this point. Saints Row, the GTA clone, was more violent (I say that because of terrorist bombings and the ability to use pipe bombs and the constant gang warfare), and was far more offensive (language, all gangs were racial stereotypes). Yet there was hardly a peep made about it because they pulled out any overly sexual content.

Personally, I'll be offended if this isn't the most offensive game ever made. All the waiting better not have been in vein!
@C'tri,

Quick question for you, why are games singled out? After all, the enforcement rating is dramatically higher than music and movies enforcement. Books have no enforcement. Why are retailers being painted as society corruptors because Lil Billy Sunovabitch got his hands on Devil May Cry from the bargain bins but nothing is said if same Billy bought a copy of American Psycho unchecked? I don't understand why video games are the least violent media out there yet the most attacked. I mean, between Billy playing a game where he is killing demons and reading a book where a yuppy rapes a severed head, I cannot for the life of me figure out why DMC is the more evil of the two.

But also let's put it this way. Parents, according to the FTC, are present for well over 90% of video game purchases for children 16 or younger. I worked retail, I know this to be true. Now, when you work retail, you get people angry when you point out game ratings. You're trying to raise their kid for them? How dare you, blah da fucking blah. Eventually cashiers and store clerks get to a point where they just give up on the warnings because of the headache. A 13 year old isn't going to have the $60 for GTA IV, his parent is. See Hot Coffee scandal. The sex portion was the part that made all these parents upset they bought this game for their preteenagers... EVIDENCE!

So as a society, I say fuck protecting the stupid. I'm tired of showing ID at Best Buy everytime I buy an M rated game. I'm nearly 30! And in the lane right next to me is another soccer mom too busy to look at the game she's buying her kid and Lil Billy Sunovabitch is pleased as punch his mother doesn't have the slightest clue what Soldier of Fortune is...

@Monkeyface

Rockstar's controversy's are a good and bad thing. On the good, it helps push boundaries. The medium is able to grow up because they are constantly proving more than children play games. On the bad, it makes them a target.

But when we have an MMO aiming to be the bloodiest MMO ever, Ninja Gaiden II showing sickening displays of dismemberment, and Soldier of Fortune perfecting their gore engine, do you REALLY think Rockstar leaving the industry would save us all controversy? Really?!? Look, for every Rockstar game you list, I can find you 10 worse games from the same era. In some ways, Rockstar diverts attention...
@MonkeyFace

Actually, no, we would have just as much drama over another game.

And the controversy didn't sell the last few GTAs for me, the game itself did.



@Steve

Don't forget the insurance fraud.
This just in...

Scuba divers said that they will get wet when they jump in the water.

News at eleven.
same old song and dance....
Thompson will, in the days and weeks ahead, be contacting state and federal officials to stop the improper sales of Grand Theft Auto IV to anyone under seventeen years of age…


That's provided of course he's got any semblance of legitimacy left with anyone, especially if he's disbarred!
E. Zachary Knight -

Lol, reminds me of a road sign I've seen. "Water on road during rain."

Maybe one day a GTA will be released that won't raise such a fuss. But that might be in a few decades or so.
[QUOTE]Rockstar is a huge publicity whore if one of their games dosent piss off jack they dont bother finishing it[/QUOTE]
Rockstar's Midnight Club series contradicts that statement.
(Shouldn't have used BB code. . .)
Expect? They're relying on it.....
Yes, In fact I'll be ready too. I'll be at my local GameStop on the 29th of April.

- Warren Lewis
Well, we've all said this before, except this time they added one to the title. Word for word, outrage for outrage, this "controversy" will be the exact same as the ones before it for the other GTA's.
EZK,

Here's a question for you: When you jump in the water, do you get wet or does the water get you?

(A internet flavored cookie if anyone can discern the lyrics I mangled to get that line)

Anyway, my empathy for Rockstar is very low. GTAIV seems to be just another in the increasingly bad line of re-hashes of a once revolutionary idea. Of course, it's not out yet, so I am open to being mistaken.
@sheppy
"After all, the enforcement rating is dramatically higher than music and movies enforcement."

Just because other media get a pass does not make it right... essentially all media should have good self-regulation, games, movies and so forth a like. Really, video games should continue their self-enforcement and other forms of media should follow them by example. Just because someone says video games should increase their self-enforcement does not automatically mean that they are fine with the current standard of other media... that's jumping to conclusions and putting words in their mouths
JT simply has an obsession with Rockstar/TT. If he was principled, he would have gone against Saints Row (GTA clone), Conan, God of War, and other games that have gone beyond what R* has done.
@sheppy

I've often wondered that about books myself. When I was in junior high I was already reading Stephen King novels like "Pet Sematary" and "It", both of which contain graphic content. I would go into stores and buy books like these and no one questioned it.

I have come to a couple conclusions about this;

1. We consider books to be somewhat sacred. With historical instances of censorship and book burnings, people are afraid of really speaking out against books in general.

2. This is the important one. I do not think your average Joe Gangbanger is a big reader. Reading is usually indicitive of some intelligence (IMO), and your average street thug is generally lacking in the brains department. I know this is a sweeping generalization, but it fits my expereicne with these types of people (some of the gangers around when I was in school would actually have trouble with the word "the").

BTW, I am not drawing the above generalization along any racial lines; stupid comes in every colour.
Triangle Man hates Person Man.

And getting 5 stars.
If Rockstar want to make controversial games, it's up to then, what I find so rib-achingly hilarious about this is that the main reason that this series makes so much money for them is thanks to censorious idiots such as Thompson and Clinton, if it hadn't been for their efforts, I suspect that GTA IV wouldn't have the level of media interest and advertising that it now has.

That's what is so damn funny, the censors are the cause, not the cure, and they're too far up their own self-importance to realise it.
@sheppy

i think, that its because they're (relatively) new, compared to other forms of entertainment.
whenever something new comes out that isn't owned by the big companies, they'll fight it.
it was the same when Cable/Satelite first happened. Torrenting was the same when it started, though i note the BBC uses it with its iPlayer.

basically, until its mainstream and established, people will take shots at it.

i personally would want the movies and so forth enforced too, though i believe that retail businesses are better at movies, than games.
why? probably because movies have been around longer, and people are used to them.

just my 2 cents.
That Dan Houser guy looks like Jimmy Hopkins (Bully) all grown up, lol. I wonder if he was the inspiration for the character's look.
Let's face one simple fact - R* is very good at direct and indirect promotion. Make no mistake, they want to be in the spotlight, they want to be talked about and they want all the attention they can get.

Look at the release of 3 screen shots of Bully a year before the game was released. All the promotion in the world was given to them on a silver platter. All they had to do was fill the pre-orders.

That is their model and it has made them very successful.

I am a little surprised they have not at least 'tweeked' their methods. But there is plenty of time for that.
If it's controversial it may be because of all the racist jokes and radio broadcasts. I've heard some insider tells which lead me to think there's more than a healthy amount of gay-bashing and jokes about Jews and Blacks in the game. that said, it was based on an early beta so you never know how it's going to end up.
"Thompson will, in the days and weeks ahead, be contacting state and federal officials to stop the improper sales of Grand Theft Auto IV to anyone under seventeen years of age…"

And we will be watching to see if Jacko's going to be forced to sell "Hot Coffee" on the streets if he gets disbarred.
I agree children under 17 shouldn't play this. However, I also think that parents should be required to raise their children.

As far as I know, children can still see rated R movies if accompanied by a parent (or is it just an adult?).

I also don't want to be prevented from buying the game if I am of the right age. JT's usually want to prevent the game from falling into anyone's hands, by claiming they are preventing it from falling into childrens hands. However, any place that sells rated R DVD's should already have a system in place to check for ID, this includes WalMart, Target, BestBuy, etc... I know GameStop has cranked up the internal heat, the others should have also. I just don't think it should be a federal crime, mearly a standard company policy, of which any company policy has always had a penalty "up to and including termination."
The thing about Thompson is not his stated goal of preventing the sales of M rated games to unaccompanied under-age buyer is not one we've ever had beef with to be honest, the problem is, his stated intention and his behaviour are at odds with each other.

Basically, with Thompson, it's become more about vendetta and profit than any kind of altruism, that became apparent when he saw how much money Halo 3 was going to make and tried to leap onto a profit-making bandwagon, however, in his usual 'Inspector Clouseu' style he botched it entirely. It was odd how Thompson completely ignored it's existence, making no 'run-up' statements like he does with Rockstar games. It was pretty apparent that it was a mad dash for a cash-cow he hadn't noticed until it was too late.

So yes, I wouldn't be surprised if GTA IV caused controversy, I also wouldn't be surprised if Thompson manages to find, in his arrogance, several quotes, statements and actions in the game that are a 'direct threat to his safety', that will probably be the tack he takes this time., accusing the game of being a direct attack on his person and demanding it be removed from the shelves.

It's kind of odd, considering Thompsons' stated goals that his solution to almost any game he takes offence to is to try and get the game declared a public nuisance so that they would be removed from the shelves entirely. I don't call that restriction in the slightest, I call it censorship.

Anyway, that said, he's irrelevant now, thanks to his own actions, he's 95% bluster and hot air and I personally will be glad to see the back of him so that, hopefully, a sensible, and more importantly, a truthful debate might take place instead of all this 'The sky is falling!' crap.
Honestly, I wish the guy from Rockstar would be honest.

He doesn't just expect controversy, he actively wants and supports it. While I actually enjoy their games, its time they were honest and just came out and said "we make shocking games because it gets us headlines".
Breaking News: The sky is blue.
"stop the improper sales of Grand Theft Auto IV to anyone under seventeen years of age…"

So is he not trying to ban it or is he just omitting that bit?

Either way I honestly doubt that GTA IV will cause controversy. It's set in a fictionalised New York but has no mention of ground zero. You can fly helicopters, and yes you could crash them into buildings but unless that building is smaller than a house I highly doubt that you could destroy the building with it so that's moot. Rockstar would have to be the biggest idiots alive to not delete anything that could cause Hot Coffee, and there is very little chance of an AO rating so we probably won't see a repeat of Manhunt.

Oh and of course the game doesn't really add anything new in terms of noteworthy controversy. Yes you can still kill cops and prostitutes, yes it will still be super violent. But come on that's all ready been exaggerated to ad naseum for San Andreas. What will the news headline be "Rockstar games released Grand Theft Auto IV, which besides more realistic graphics and physics is still the same exact game we caused a hissy fit over last time . . . now onto the weather."

Give me a break.
@void

You CAN'T recreate 9/11 the only thing you can fly in this game is a helicopter. And even assuming said helicopter could destroy a skyscraper in the game (that's assuming rockstar was dumb enough to let that happen) it would be hard to pull off 9/11 (that's assuming that destroying two skyscrapers (the WTC isn't in the game) would qualify). You'd need to get a helicopter get it going at high speeds, propel yourself towards a skyscraper jump out at the last second, release a parachute, then find another copter and another parachute and do it again. Personally I prefer Rampage for destroying tall buildings and 'plane hits building, plane explodes, nothing happens to the building,' is in a lot of games.
is it just me or have the stories gotten a little predictable.
@Father Time

I know that. I was giving that as an exanmple of what I expect to hear from the Fruit Loop Brigade, although I probably should not be giving them any ideas. Just because it is not true does not mean that Faux News won't report it if some self described "expert" says it's true.

I love the Rampage games. Rampage was the first video game I really enjoyed playing as a kid. There's just something fun about destroying cities... in games that is.
@void

Personally I doubt they will "you can recreate 9/11" then they show a video of a helicopter slamming into a skyscraper and blowing up, I doubt that most people would be convinced.

Although they could get someone else to say it.

In any case I don't really see why they would bother unless it gets blamed for some random murder.
Rockstar doesn't even have to advertise GTA4 if they don't want to. The inevitable moral panic will do it for them.
well, this disproves the statement "no news is good news"
@Father Time

What I was really getting at is not that Rockstar make controversial games deliberately to cause that controversy, but that the very controversy, and the sales and popularity generated by it, are what makes the keep making sequels.

Yes, I fully agree it's market force that powers the existence of these games, but if Thompson should be taking Rockstar to court for anything, it's backpay from their advertising department.

Taboo's are the greatest temptation known to man, and attempting to decry or destroy something is a surefire way of attracting attention to it. So yes, consumer pressure is what led to GTA IV being written, but Thompson etc are a large cause of that consumer interest in the series, young adults, particularly males, like to do things that they are 'forbidden' to do, so if an old guy with white hair comes along and starts preaching on TV about how evil and terrible a game is, most young males first reaction is going to be 'I've gotta see this!'. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Thompson is indirectly responsible for a lot of under-age purchases of GTA 3, so yes, I do think that it pays Rockstar to keep that controversy going.

I'll accept, however, that Rockstar don't only write controversial games, Table Tennis isn't really that controversial, and you'd have to be pretty imaginative to include a 'Hot Coffee' with it, after all, a Ping Pong table can only stand so much punishment....
Meteor - And Rockstar's Ping Pong title was also a game that could contradict that theory.
I should read the comments before I post, GoodRobotUs already said that. Anyway, Rockstar is just a game company that isn't afraid to release controversial titles. They shouldn't be afraid. I think game developers should say what they want to say, when they want to say it and how they want to say it. And gamers should be free to consume whatever content they desire to consume. We should all be free to choose what we enjoy as long as we aren't harming anyone else. And last time I checked sitting on the couch and playing some GTA isn't harming anyone. It is actually soothing and relaxing after a bad day so if anything it prevents me from doing anything like that, not like I need it but if you think things through you are less likely to make bad choices when you are venting anger in a harmless way.
I suppose it's like 'Lady Chatterly's Lover', or 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre', though oddly enough both were more explicit in their own way than GTA. Neither of those two became famous because they were particularly good, Lady Chatterly's lover is not far from something someone might write for Penthouse as an 'erotic tale', and Texas Chainsaw Massacre probably achieved nothing more than a shortage of red paint and tomato ketchup in whatever state it was filmed in. Neither would really of got past the bar of 'they happened' if it had not been for the controversy caused by other people.

GTA is, for me, much the same thing, it's not an exceptional game, it's interesting, I like Sandbox environments, and I won't deny that I'm looking forward to sampling the atmosphere of the city in GTA IV, I played GTA 3, and was far more impressed by it's scope than by the storyline itself, which I never completed. What made it a legend in the computer game industry is, once again, the controversy caused by other people, right from it's first release, if it hadn't been for that, it probably would have never got to the number of iterations that it has, and clones certainly would not have begun to appear.
Didn't Thompson get banned from harassing Rockstar bout their games? I could've sworn there was something about that, or was that just Bully?

But yeah, its Rockstar/Take-Two and this kinda crap happens all the time, and no, they don't rely on publicity like people think, its just received due to all the watch dog groups, and Jack Thompson.
I am sure that if the Chicago mall shooter got caught Jack Thompson would demand to find out if the shooter had any of the Grand Theft Auto games so he could start trouble for Grand Theft Auto 4. I remember about a month ago Jack was demanding to know if the Omaha mall shooter had a owned any GTA games. If the Chicago mall shooter is caught and has GTA then he could have Jack try to defend him.
@father time
I think if someone gets Faux News, or really any other news program to report it, then it will be beleived. People are far too trustisng of news in a time where information takes a back seat to ratings. People are more likely to pay attention to a story called "se"xbox than a well thought out and written news story refuting ludicrous claims by the latest attention whore who wants the entire world to be made of Nerf so the little kiddies need never be exposed to any rough edges, and people will beleive it. If you don't believe it, then consider how many years we have been hearing that you get "points" for killing cops, or that killing hookers is an integral part of the gameplay.

It will get blamed for a murder. Jack-o was making his career trying to free murderers from any personal responsibility for a while there while trying to make it be all GTA's fault. Someone who played a GTA game at some point in their life will kill someone else, and it will be GTA's fault. Remember that Doom was responsible for the Columbine murders because the two little cretins played Doom a few years earlier. The average sheep-like members of the public ate that up because they didn't know any better, and they trusted the media.
"Now remember lets not let the truth get in the way of our fear mongering!"

http://fanboys-online.com/index.php?cid=6
let the games begin.
Meh. Why can't GTA IV come out nine days earlier!?

>.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 07/04/09 at 01:18pm
Andrew Eisen: Rodrigo - A fun idea but you might want to fix the typos.
Posted 07/04/09 at 12:57pm
GRIZZAM PRIME: Happy 4th of July!
Posted 07/04/09 at 12:44pm
Yuuri: Happy Blow Crap Up Day!
Posted 07/04/09 at 11:09am
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: I designed this shirt for Jack debate today: http://i44.tinypic.com/2552t89.jpg
Posted 07/04/09 at 11:06am
BearDogg-X: There's a one minute and a half preview of the video game episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! up at http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/home.do
Posted 07/04/09 at 10:08am
Arcanagos: Happy 4th all
Posted 07/04/09 at 09:32am
Firebird: Greetings GP community, and HAPPY 4th of JULY!!!
Posted 07/04/09 at 03:48am
Michael Chandra: I missed out on Jack? =(
Posted 07/04/09 at 01:52am
Escanor94: hmm, looks like when someone gets banned all their comments are automaticly deleted
Posted 07/03/09 at 11:46pm
Arcanagos: aww, did i miss the JT party? :(
Posted 07/03/09 at 11:00pm
Leet Gamer Jargon: Where's the recent JT bullcrap? Which comments section has he vomited on? EDIT: Nevermind; it's in the "Radio" thread.
Posted 07/03/09 at 09:17pm
BearDogg-X: I wonder what the Metropolitian Moron of Miami said in response to my comment saying that he got a dose of his medicine on the SGC09 Debate thread?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:51pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He gets offended with a bunch of flowers.
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:49pm
GoodRobotUs: LOL He takes offence at the fact he might have *chosen* to be crazy?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:47pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He warned me to get a lawyer after I called him "crazy by his own choice"... that´s libel for him
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:45pm
HilaryDuffGta: "libel" what did he threaten now?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:44pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Was fun to be threatened for "libel" again.
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:26pm
HilaryDuffGta: hey so what did i miss??? the usual spam of "crap"
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:15pm
FlakAttack: Jack ruined his chance to have civil debates with us here. Glad you banned him (again).
Posted 07/03/09 at 04:04pm
Krono: Unexpected is probably the best word to describe it. Particularly as no decent reason is given.
Login or register to post shouts