Journalist Calls Out PTC on GTA IV Drunk Driving Claims

May 9, 2008 -

Taking  the Parents Television Council up on an interview offer, Phil Villarreal of the Arizona Daily Star spoke with Dan Isett (left), PTC Director of Public Policy about Grand Theft Auto IV.

Along with a number of other watchdog groups, the PTC has been highly critical of GTA IV in recent days. Villarreal, however, reports that Isett's knowledge of what is actually in the game is a bit lacking:

Isett: I’ve actually played ‘Grand Theft Auto IV,’ and it’s right in keeping with previous versions. The series continues to lower the bar and this is the first game that has an alcohol content warning. You get points for driving drunk in this game.

Villarreal: You know that’s not true, right? The game doesn’t have points.

Isett: If nothing else, it’s a rewarded activity. Necessary for advancement.

Villarreal: I don’t think so.

Isett: But there’s an alcohol content warning and a scene of drunk driving, correct?

Villarreal: Yes. Did you play that part?

Isett: No, no. I didn’t get that far...


Comments

I wonder where these folks were when Vice City featured the "Boomshine Saigon" mission, in which the utterly smashed Phil Cassidy blasts his arm off and starts spouting bizarre Vietnam-inspired messages about black crows coming to take him away while the screen spins and dilates as Tommy Vercetti tries to drive him to the hospital? That was one of the most surreal gaming experiences I'd ever had, yet I never heard nary a word of complaint against its portrayal of the dangerous use of explosives.
---
Fangamer

I find it amazing that someone (or some organization) would make a national campaign of railing against a form of media without observing it for themselves. It takes a good deal of work to put together a national campaign like this, would it kill someone in office to sit down a play the game first?

@ Simon Roberts

That was a mandatory mission in the game, and it is quite clear that these type of people don't play the game; so they would have no idea that it's in there. Besides, the naysayers focus on the optional, non-important aspects of the game.

When you get drunk in GTA4, your friend tells you probably shouldn't drive and suggests you call a cab. If you ignore him and drive drunk anyway, it's very difficult, you're likely to crash and/or hit pedestrians, and if the cops see you they will pull you over and arrest you.

That's totally the same as the game requiring you to drive drunk in order to advance, right?

Why didn't the interviewer tell him that? His response of "I don’t think so" is so disappointing. I wanted to hear that ignorant asshole get *shut down*. It was a perfect opportunity, wasted. :(

You'd think the PTC would have learned it's lesson years ago about false information when they paid the WWF/E three million to settle a lawsuit brought against them due to the BS they were spreading.

Wow he was not right about anything. Including them lowering the bar. If anything the bar has been raised. The violence is barely graphic, any negative behavior is punished, and, most importantly, the graphics sure are pretty.

Isett = Fail

I've never even played the GTA games, and this is rediculous! Made me laugh, though :D Asshole. He judges a game and insists he knows everything about it, then admits he hasn't finished it. GP, please tell me you made this whole thing up...this can't be court!

@Kovitlac

Actually, this is par for the course. The 'experts' have seen 5 minutes of video, have never played the game, and are latched onto an idea that can easily be proven as wrong.

Just a normal day in the week for Game Politics I think.

So you admit you are a shit talker then? Well I never imagined...

Adding to Simon Roberts' post, an LiveJournal friend of mine pointed out that in Saints Row, you could get drunk and high while driving and nobody said anything about that then.

No, Isett, don't bullshit us. You think we were born yesterday? You didn't get this far in the game because it was impossible for you, for the simple reason you simply didn't put the game inside the console. Heck, if you've read the back cover of the game, I'd already be surprised. Moron.

First thing I did when I played the game was check up online and find out how to drive drunk. Bad idea. The only reward I can see is pulling off a god-awesome stunt and posting a video on YouTube.

Just about every crime you break in a GTA game is a punished behavior. You rack up money (Might as well be points, I guess), but the higher that wanted level goes, the harder it is to do anything except hide under a bridge and hope the cops keep driving into the river instead of taking the ramp around the other side. Its fun going on a rampage, but if you're in the game to finish it (which is what I generally consider the "reward"), you're not getting very far by making a big scene all the time.

I actually drove drunk in the game for the first time today. Not only is it not a 'rewarded activity' but it's incredibly stupid from a gameplay perspective. The police are all over you if they even get a hint that you're driving drunk and, since you're weaving all over the road the odds are very high that they'll catch you. Then, since you can't even walk straight they'll either lock you up (confiscating your weapons - a decidedly BAD thing) or put you in hospital - neither of which are 'rewards' as far as I can see. Personally, I don't play the game with the goal of getting jailed or shot - maybe Dan Isett does.

In fact, as others have said, the game consistently punishes 'violence for its own sake'. The best course of action is almost always to keep the level of violence low. For instance, when you're tasked with killing a gang and the police show up you'd be crazy to start shooting police. The only mission I've seen where this isn't the case is the bank robbery, where you have to defend yourself by shooting cops.

bitch FUCK MOTHERING slapped

This guy obviously doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

In other news, ignorance has once again reached never before seen levels...
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenI get the feeling Nintendo suspected the same thing would happen with the Wii U.07/02/2015 - 12:16pm
Andrew EisenMecha - Yeah, pretty much the only way you're getting away with a console that's a full technological generation behind is if it become's a full-blown pop-culture phenomenon like the Wii.07/02/2015 - 12:16pm
Infophile(cont'd) That's basically what the article is saying about rape. If you don't know enough about it to handle it well, it's a bad idea to do it, as you'll probably do it poorly.07/02/2015 - 12:06pm
Infophile@Goth, EZK: For example, I could very well try to write a book about the difficulties of living with Fibromyalgia. No one would stop me. However, since I don't know a thing about living with fibromyalgia, writing a book about it would be a very bad idea.07/02/2015 - 12:05pm
MechaCrashI just hope they realize that part of the problem with the Wii U was its relative lack of power. You can still make good games with what the Wii U has, but third parties won't want to deal with it when they can target the more popular PS4/XB1.07/02/2015 - 10:59am
Andrew EisenReplace "NX" with "QOL" and I'd buy it as potentially true.07/02/2015 - 10:51am
Andrew EisenNintendo to start manufacturing NX in October to target a July 2016 launch with 20 million consoles shipped the first year. Sure... http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20150702PD204.html07/02/2015 - 10:47am
james_fudgeLet's avoid name calling in the shoutbox07/02/2015 - 8:55am
E. Zachary KnightThe Daily WTF has a nice run down of some of the impact to software that the US Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage has. http://thedailywtf.com/articles/i-m-not-married-to-the-idea07/02/2015 - 7:45am
MechaCrashGee, how did people ever get the idea Gaters are morons who argue in bad faith? It's such a mystery.07/02/2015 - 7:03am
E. Zachary KnightGoth, again, no one is saying that we shouldn't be writig uncomfortable subject matter. What people are saying is that chances are you are going to write it poorly so it would be better to not have done it at all.07/02/2015 - 7:00am
Goth_Skunkdiscussed or portrayed in an expressive medium. Such an opinion only serves to stifle discussion. And as I said before, the only thing not worth talking about is what shouldn't be talked about.07/02/2015 - 6:50am
Goth_Skunk@Info: The same reason why I would entertain the notion that the Wired article writer could be right: Curiosity. Except in this case, I'm not curious at all. I'm not interested in hearing anyone's opinion on why uncomfortable subject matter shouldn't be07/02/2015 - 6:49am
IvresseI think the problem with the Batmobile is that they made it a core aspect of the game that you have to do continuously. If it was basically a couple of side games that were needed for secret stuff or a couple of times in the main game, it would be fine.07/02/2015 - 5:38am
Infophile@Goth: If you're not willing to entertain the idea you might be wrong, fine. That's your right. But why should anyone else entertain the idea that you might be right? If they go by the same logic, they already know you're wrong, so why listen to you?07/02/2015 - 3:53am
MattsworknameEh, I love the new batmobile personally, it's a blast to mess aroudn with. Plus, the game is set in a situation that mroe or less leaves batman with no choice but to go full force. And even then, it still shows him doing all he can to limit casualties.07/01/2015 - 11:38pm
Andrew EisenAgreed. Luckily, we don't seem to be in danger of that of late. No one's suggesting, for example, that tanks shouldn't be in video games, only that the tank in Arkham Knight is poorly implemented and out of place from a characterization standpoint.07/01/2015 - 11:27pm
MattsworknameConfederate flag, Relgious organizations, etc etc. Andrew isnt[ wrong, just remember not to let that mentality lead to censorship.07/01/2015 - 11:20pm
Mattsworknamefind offensive or disturbing, and that mindset leads to censorship. It's all well and good to say "This would be better IF", just so long as we remember not to let it slide into "This is offensive, REMOVE IT". IE , the current issues surroundign the07/01/2015 - 11:19pm
MattsworknameAndrew and goth both have points, and to that point, I'll say. Saying somethign is improved by changing something isn't a problem, on that I agree with , but at the same time, on of the issues we have in our society is that we want to simply remove things07/01/2015 - 11:18pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician