BREAKING: Rockstar Confirms Manhunt 2 PSP Hack

November 1, 2007 -
Since late yesterday GamePolitics has been following a rumor that hackers had discovered a means to reveal the original, unedited content of Manhunt 2.

Now we've had confirmation from a Take Two representative that it's not a rumor.

It's true.

In other words, the apparent hack made visible some - but apparently far from all - of the content found in the version of the game rated "Adults Only" by the ESRB.

Here is the statement just sent to GamePolitics:
Multiple edits were made to revise Manhunt 2 for its M-rated version.

Hackers apparently have altered one of those edits to produce an illegally modified version of the game that can only be played on an unauthorized, modified PlayStation Portable handheld system.

All of the game material, and especially these specific edits, was submitted to and reviewed by the ESRB in accordance with requirements regarding disclosure that were enacted two years ago and any contrary suggestion is inaccurate and irresponsible.

Take-Two Chairman Strauss Zelnick said, "I stand behind the game and the ESRB ratings process. It is unfortunately the case that no one in the entertainment software industry is immune from hacking. We hope that consumers will not engage in hacking or download illegally modified copies of our games. We encourage them to enjoy our games as they are meant to be played. We would also like to emphasize that Manhunt 2 is intended for an audience aged 17 and above."

While not of Hot Coffee caliber, the news will provide fuel for critics of Rockstar, Take Two and the ESRB.

It is not clear whether further hacker activity could reveal additional Manhunt 2 edits, but attempts will certainly be made. Take Two's spokesman could not speculate as to whether hackers might be able to unlock AO content on the PS2 or Wii versions of the game.

On the plus side, new Take Two chairman Strauss Zelnick came clean immediately on the hack. As much as anything, it was Take Two's inept and deceptive handling of the 2005 Hot Coffee affair which allowed it to swirl out of control.

GP: I want to make clear that, according to Take Two, the hack does not reveal the entire AO-rated version of the game, only a portion thereof.

Comments

@JT

The above is the same doublespeak we got from T2 with Hot Coffee.

No it isn't you idiot. Learn your history, duh.

T2 and Rockstar initially denied that Hot Coffee was present at all, and blamed hackers for creating the mini-game. Only later did they admit it was there, but then blamed the hackers for unlocking it.

God damn are you dense sometimes.

These idiots left the edits in, and they were told by the ESRB NEVER TO DO THAT AGAIN!

Again, you are so thick I'm not surprised you failed your bar exam first try.

The ESRB told them to never again leave the edits in AND NOT TELL THE ESRB ABOUT IT. If they left it in, but disclosed it in the ESRB application, then it was ok. So they are 100% in compliance with ESRB rules.

The didn’t heed the FTC’s warning to nail their butts if they ever did it again.

And again you fail. The FTC warned them to never include content AND NOT TELL THE ESRB ABOUT IT. But they informed the ESRB, so they are 100% in compliance with the FTC's demands.

Jeeze Louise Jack, if you're going to quote history, get it right. You aren't the Ministry of Truth here, you can't go back and alter the records of what happened...
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

I was going to put up a preemptive comment for when the Miami soon-to-be-ex-lawyer would post, but I think I'll just sit back this time. I'll just say that this only applies to hacked PSP users, and it still doesn't make the game buyable by children, so the hack isn't harming them.

This is the work of a hacker. The ESRB should NEVER be held accountable for this, but we all know the watchdog groups and Jack Thompson will fry all of them. I feel sorry for the ESRB because some sick and twisted hacker just had to see the sick action he/she wanted to see.

Kudos to Zelnick for his way of handling this

Thanks for clearing that up, vellocet. It's good to see how it works. That whole thing just proves Jackie-boy wrong again.

At least this time they're not trying to cover it up first.

@Jabrwock

This is still going to be bad. The problem is that the general public doesn't understand technology. To them it will be something easily removed that circumvents the ESRB rating.

It will invalidate the ESRB rating (in the same way that Hot Coffee did). Make them look REALLY bad. And give JT and the others exactly the ammunition they need.

It's really unfortunately that JT and the rest of the population doesn't understand the technology. Defending this will be very difficult, especially when people won't/are unable to grasp/don't want to learn the information required to know why it shouldn't be an issue.

There's really nothing that Rockstar could have done this time around (I don't think they did anything wrong). But the environment that was created by Hot Coffee (which was the fault of Rockstar AND the ESRB) makes this time around an incredibly volatile situation.

JT, this requires people to hack their system, and the game. This could be done to ANY game. How about the Punisher game? It had the gore scenes changed to black and white to get an M rating, but then there were hacks to see the scenes in full colour. Where were you then asshole?

You will be buried by your personal vendetta with TT. It is obvious you hae an obsession, and use selective targeting in order to get what you want.

The developer of the game cannot control what people do to the game once it has been released. I know you do not have an understanding of how code is written, or how it works, but any game released on the market can be hacked to achieve whatever the people doing the hacking desire.

In this case it involved deleting code. The code is there, and people are deleting it. No code was hidden, as was the case with Hot Coffee. Prepare for another failure if you choose to pursue this line of attack.

Ah, and magically his posts appear.

And once agian, his information is wrong. Oh well.

I'm done here; it's old news now. Wake me up when the baseless lawsuits start flying.

Here's what the ESRB actually said in July '05:

"Going forward, the ESRB will now require all game publishers to submit any pertinent content shipped in final product even if is not intended to ever be accessed during game play or remove it from the final disc."

That doesn’t say unplayable code cannot exist, just that it must be disclosed. Furthermore, we’ve seen no evidence that any unplayable code (kill animations) have been unlock. Only the filter obscuring the kills has been disabled.

This is not in any way damaging to Take-Two or the ESRB. Both, from what we’ve seen so far, have done exactly what they’ve said they would.


Andrew Eisen

@vellocet

It will invalidate the ESRB rating (in the same way that Hot Coffee did).

Yeah, I know. Still, ironic that it's true, yet Jack still has to lie when talking about it. He was handed a perfectly plain reason to bitch about the ESRB (that they would let the edits stand without demanding code removal as well), yet he still feels the need to lie through his teeth about it.

It's like he's a pathological liar or something. Maybe there's a cream for that...
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

You know. Given Jack's commentary, I'd like to open a serious item of discussion. It's old, but it apparently needs repeating here.

Should the ESRB or Rockstar be responsible for the actions of the mod community? Let's face it. Without some serious digging into the code, no one should be able to access those scenes.

Of course, on the flip-side of the argument, You'd think Rockstar would've learned by now not to leave anything in. That lesson can be taken from Hot Coffee, or hell, Murphy's law.

Responses anyone? Jack's made his stance I think. (Rockstar should be held liable) Any other views? Seriously. This could turn entertaining.

@Jack

The ESRB made it REALLY clear that if a developer left code in a game that could be unlocked, then that would be a huge violation of ESRB rules.

Do you ever actually tell the truth about things other people have said? Or are you mentally incapable of honestly quoting someone?

The ESRB made it REALLY clear that if a developer left code in a game that could be unlocked, AND DIDN'T TELL THE ESRB ABOUT SAID CODE, then it would be a huge violate of ESRB rules.

TT disclosed everything. So you fail.
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

Oh. and sorry for the quick turnaround, but this is @ Jack Thompson:

Can the ESRB really be held responsible for what the publisher left in? They're only informed of what the publisher tells them. They aren't handed a print-out of the code or what alterations to it can do. They're handed a video. True, Rockstar may be punished (see above debate question), but the ESRB hardly has a say, don't you suppose?

To clarify... the reason why I think Hot Coffee is still screwing up the industry is this.

Hot Coffee WAS the work of hackers, though not in the way that Rockstar said. If nobody had hacked it, there would have been no way to access the assets and code for the Hot Coffee mini-game. The BIG problem is that the ESRB reversed their rating and made it AO.

This set a precedent. Even if content cannot be access by normal play, it must still abide by the ESRB rating (i.e. even if it's available by hack).

It is this precedent set by the ESRB that now opens the industry to attack.

I've been saying for years that the EULA needs to be amended to say that modification of content in anyway through unconventional methods be considered illegal.

We're in a lot of trouble...

John Bruce,
As has already been pointed out, you are overlooking the detailed FACTS as presented in the article:

"All of the game material, and especially these specific edits, was submitted to and reviewed by the ESRB in accordance with requirements regarding disclosure that were enacted two years ago and any contrary suggestion is inaccurate and irresponsible."

"On the plus side, new Take Two chairman Strauss Zelnick came clean immediately on the hack. As much as anything, it was Take Two’s inept and deceptive handling of the 2005 Hot Coffee affair which allowed it to swirl out of control."

Perhaps it would have been in YOUR best interest (believe it or not) for the ESRB to have responded to this situation first. Apparently, T2/R* DID reveal the edits (though, one wonders if they revealed them as having "hidden" the content or "deleted" the content). If they lied to the ESRB as to the manner of edits, then that's another story. It may fall closer to the "Hot Coffee" situation. But, if they told the truth, and the ESRB followed a path other than what you claim they did, then the fault may fall on the ESRB. Then again, they may have told the ESRB the WHOLE Truth, and the ESRB did not make demands as you suggest, meaning YOU are the liar and deceiver. Time will tell.

And, certainly, T2 is apparently handling the situation Publically far differently than the "Hot Coffee" incident.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Oops. But anyone who manages to unlock any of the edits will have to break the law to do that right? So its a crime right? So should Take Two be blamed for people breaking the law? Aaaah, crap. Here we go again.........

John Bruce,
OH, and you have to remember that there were TWO incidents in the issue of "Hot Coffee". There was the unlocking of existing code by hackers that unlocked SOFTCORE adult content. Then, there was the mod community who altered, in one fashion or another, the code so that what was displayed wasn't even meant to be displayed in even the original version of GTA: SA. Combining the two situations to confuse that issue doesn't help your argument either.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Jabrwock,
Thanks for the clarification about what the ESRB actually did say.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

@AgnostoTheo

The problem is that the portion of the game that was left in NEEDS to be left in.

Here's an analogy. Let's say there was a movie that had nudity in it, and the producers decided to remove the nudity by putting black bars over it... Now, the actors are still there, just with black bars. The blurring in Manhunt 2 is equivalent to black bars. If someone were to remove the black bars, the underlying nudity is still there... but in order to remove THAT you'd have to remove the actors, and then you wouldn't have a movie anymore.

I am glad to see that Take Two fessed up the Same day the Mod was found. I am also glad to see that Take Two disclosed this possibility to the ESRB when seeking a rating.

Despite what Jack Thompson says, Take Two did not violate any ESRB or FTC rules or rulings. They played by the rules and they are not trying to hide this like they did with Hot Coffee.

Lemme chew on this for a second. Seems like there are two separate issues. Correct me if I'm wrong.

1 - Basically concerns the theory that Rockstar didn't necessarily remove offensive sections of the code; they just added addt'l code to give us "blurry-cam" moments that I guess, somehow make violence more acceptable to conservatives. The hack, theorhetically, removes the blurry cam code.

While I would call this lazy programming, I can see why they did it. They were likely trying for a halloween launch, and let's face it, coding in distort-o-vision is easier and faster then having the concepts guys dream up new ideas for the sequence and then ordering your code jockeys to get it done from the ground up. Not to mention any extra work the modelers had to do.

The second issue seems to revolve around Jack's assertion that the the ESRB is somehow negligent for allowing this. Again.

"If the ESRB allowed any code to be left in which could be unlocked, then the ESRB is a goner."

(Sigh). Jack. Do you have any idea how incredibly unenforceable that is? Didn't I see an interview with Pat Vance somewhere where she said she has 3 or 4 full time rate-ers. Let me get this straight. You want 3 or 4 people to break down the game code line by line and guarantee that there's no hidden gotchas? Who's to say these raters even could understand the code?? When they couldn't even play through the game?

Now, as much as I hate to admit it, I may actually defend Jack now, because he might actually have a point. I shall endeavor to phrase what I'm thinking without the usual rhetoric.

1. If the ESRB has policies that are unenforceable (like guaranteeing no hidden code), then the system is broken and needs to be rethought.
2. If the ESRB vouches to the public things that it couldn't possibly know, (like no hidden code), then the system is broken.
3. If the devs are actively trying to sneak code past the ESRB, then again, perhaps the system is broken.

I, for one, will be interested to see Pat Vance's reaction: seems to me like she's shown considerable diplomatic skill in the past, and I will be curious to see how she addresses this when the hysterical uptight conservatives come a callin'

@JT
The content is there, but it is inaccessible without modification. If I turn my toaster into a laser gun and hurt someone with it, it is not the fault of the toaster manufacturer - I'm the one that made the modification. If some lowly theater employee modifies a movie from the original format by adding porn before showing it, it is not the fault of the production company.

Again, this is a game intended for mature audiences only - it says as much on the box. Further, no studies show causation between game violence and real life violence - even the studies you site say there is no causal link (if you read the whole thing and don't just cherry pick your quotes, that is), and any increase in aggression lasts only a few minutes, much the same as a rousing game of football or basketball.

Also, many of those studies done, particularly the earlier ones, are fundamentally flawed. If you are playing a game in a lab while a bunch of people are watching, then you're not playing for pleasure, you're *performing*. If they want a proper study done on the effects of gaming, then they should perform those tests in the gamer's native environment.

You lose, Jack.

I can't believe i'm typing this....

Jack has an actual valid point.

This is potentially huge.

Wether R* violated the ESRB's requirements or the FTC's is irrelevant. The fact is they left material in that is unlockable in a game they KNEW would be controversial, material they "removed" to get the game rated at a level that they could actually sell.

This is, quite frankly, a STUPID move. I mean, what's thier next trick? Wearing lifelike deer costumes for the next hunting season?

@JT
Oh yeah, this same logic applies with the Sims modifications, too - another one you were totally off the mark on.

@jack thompson, attorney

Considering you have to:

a) have a specially-modified PSP that Sony has been strongly against for quite some time now (and have done virtually everything in their power to not permit), then

b) actually modify the data directly on the disk itself, which requires a bit of hardware to make new UMD disks, and to copy it to a system where you can make the changes, then that ends with

c) this isn't the "mod community" here, nor is it by any stretch of the imagination considered "accessible" except for the most determined of people, with the right equipment, and the know-how to accomplish this.

Your statements are gross over-generalizations of terminology, which basically leads to you are arguing on the grounds of semantics, not a very sturdy or stable basis for your claims. But since when did you care about that?

@JT

I will personally pay you $10000 if the ESRB is shut down over this.

Yup. I knew this was going to happen. *sigh*

This is one of the reasons I was against this game in the first place. I knew that Rockstar would pull something like this again. All they seem to care about is controversy, no matter how much their stupidity hurts the industry as a whole.

Thompson,

thank you for posting in a civil tone, keep it up. aside from that, i disagree with about half your statements.

i do agree that Rockstar did something stupid and will now pay the piper. but they disclosed to the ESRB the hack as soon as they became aware of it, which means the ESRB is not at fault, just R*.

"If the ESRB allowed any code to be left in which could be unlocked, then the ESRB is a goner"

I'd like to see where is says that code cannot be left in which could be unlocked. This is IMPOSSIBLE. What the heck does "unlocked" mean? The "unlocking" of code is merely changing variables in memory. Which... at it's core is what a computer program is. If you have code that cannot be "unlocked", you would have non functioning piece of software.

This kind of a "modification" was like the modifications I used to do to adventure games where I rewrote the dialog of the game entirely to be extremely satirical and sarcastic. Is it the fault of the game developer for what I did to the game? Nope.

Now watch this blow over because it's only unlocked violence, and not unlocked sexuality. Remember, this is America.

I'm also rather surprised Thompson didn't add "FIRST POAST" to the end of his comment.

@Scott

Wether R* violated the ESRB’s requirements or the FTC’s is irrelevant.

That's the thing. Jack gets handed a perfectly good issue to be mad about (the ESRB allowing the edits to proceed knowing they could potentially be hacked), and what does he do with that? Run with it?

Nope. He lies through his teeth about stuff that never happened.

I mean that's like Fox News getting ready to run the story on Bill Clinton's blowjob, and just because they can't help it, throw in a claim that he bit a baby's head off. Why? Why bother? Was it not scandalous enough?

Jack's got a psychological problem alright. Not that he's paranoid, or obsessed, but that he's a pathological liar. Even about stuff that legitimately supports his claim.

He's so used to lying through his teeth, he couldn't tell the truth if his life depended on it.

---

Now, on to the ESRB issue. My guess is that the ESRB ok'd the "M" because certain scenes were deleted altogether, and other scenes were made inaccessible enough that the majority of players would no longer see them as they were in the original.

So it falls down to a judgment call people might disagree with, rather than a call based on false information.
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

The shit is going to hit the fan when the PS2 hack comes out (and after analyzing the hack - is most definitely will).

This will NOT be confined to the PSP.

The only thing they unlocked was to take a layer off of the effects. In order to make that whole scene, they would HAVE to start with uncut material anyways. Just like making changes with filters in Photoshop, you need to start with the original picture before applying anything. So if I "reverse edit" a photo, that's nobody's fault but my own. So why in the heck are they blaming R* for this anyways? At least they are being open about it happening and working towards a resolution.

It's good to see that at least T2 has learned something from their last issue. Be that as it may, Joe Sixpack down the street isn't going to care about the ESRB rules and regs. He's going to care about what talking heads are going to spout about this. Heads like Mr. Thompson and his ilk will milk this for all it's worth, even though in the end, T2 has done nothing wrong. They played by the rules.

Way to go Rockstar. The one game is was critical that you didn't leave any backdoors into, particularly after Hot Coffee and you leave them wide open, proving once again that half the time its your own stupidity that gets yourself and the industry the bad rap it has. I don't think the original game should have had to be censored in the first place but for the love of everything, when you're going to agree to modify it to comply with the rating, don't make the same stupid mistake you made before and leave an easily discoverable backdoor int hat can enable people to access content beyond the rating. Bravo indeed! It's getting harder and harder to stand behind these people.

@Unaffiliated anonymous

Now watch this blow over because it’s only unlocked violence, and not unlocked sexuality. Remember, this is America.

True. It won't cause as big a stink as Hot Coffee, no matter how much JT would pretend it will.

All this hack does is make it so that it doesn't flash crazy lights when you stab someone, or stick a machete in their head. You still see the action, but it's garbled.

That was Kotaku's beef. That it didn't really "obscure" the killing, it just made it annoying instead.
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

Thats fucking it. Jack, take your head out of your ass so you can listen to something but the shit you keep coming up with.

Due to people like you screaming bloody murder because of this game, they were forced to make changes, of which even YOU denied happened. However, the modding community is vast. Very vast. People with all sorts of skills and knowledge exist. Hell, if they found a way to unlock something that was originally locked, wow. Great. But lets look at your fucked up logic here.

~~~~~

The Truth:
Manhunt 2 is released without any of this content readily available. The ESRB more than likely knows that these things can be locked out, and were. At the time of the second rating, the content was locked without possibility of playing said AO rated parts. The general populus is unable to play the parts that were locked. R* saves face, and some money and time, and releases on Halloween. After release, modders instantly shoot onto the game to attempt to unlock certain parts, and find a way to do so, using a modded PSP. Modifying a PSP is not authorized in any way, so R* and the ESRB normally don't worry about that (that would be like Ford worrying about people using their cars to kill people...its not something allowed so they don't worry about that). Modding a PSP takes alot of time, patience, and luck in most cases. Many under the age of 18 can't even comprehend how to do this. As well, R* does admit the parts were locked out but cannot be found in any conventional method. R* makes mention that the game is not meant for children at all, and even urges paren'ts not to buy the game for their kids.

~~~~

Now, your fucked up logic and way of thinking:
Manhunt 2 is being released to market towards children and teach them how to kill people through use of this "murder simulator". Rockstar's main goal is to teach those at a young age exactly how to go about killing in violent ways even though the box clearly states the game is intended for mature audiences only. Rockstar never edited the game out, but instead had the ESRB lower its rating because thats the evil way the game industry works. But now that proof has came out that it WAS edited, even though its extremely difficult for the unlocked version to fall into the hands of children, its all done on purpose, with the thought in mind that children know exactly how to mod a psp, then get the psp version and play it. Therefore, the murder simulator still exists to train these children.

~~~~~

Jack, I used to laugh so much when I was writing your chapter for the book "Blame the Game". Now you just disgust me. You talk about how you don't want children to get ahold of these games, and that you aren't for censorship (your email is amendmentone@wherever.com for christ's sake!) yet you continue to show up on here and throw things into the faces of those that aren't even children. You talk about your "victories" and how you have "won"? You walk around in a scared world, a false prophet trying to keep your liar's tongue as high as it can be.

I hope, for your sake, when you die, God invites you to play Halo 3 with him, or see this sick kill he got in Manhunt 2. Because then you can blame things like...Katrina...on him playing violent games.

I'm disgusted, and you should be ashamed, Jack. And by the way, if you want a debate over any of this, I'll not only stand up any time and any place, I'll finish it off with handing you a copy of the book, signed, and a bookmark where your chapter is. And try to sue me for defamation too. If you do, I'd suggest getting a lawyer game and getting really good at it.

$11,000 fine per copy of Manhunt 2 sold? Wow!


FTC Rules on Hot Coffee


In a long-awaited ruling, the Federal Trade Commission has found that the companies behind Grand Theft Auto San Andreas engaged in deceptive marketing practices.

The FTC issued a press release this morning, wrapping up a 10-month investigation into the so-called "Hot Coffee" scandal.

Although the FTC concluded that Take-Two and Rockstar used deceptive marketing practices by not revealing that hidden sex animations were on the GTA San Andreas disc, the proposed penalty was quite moderate, at least in economic terms. The ruling is a blow, however, to the public image of both companies as well as the video game industry.

Under terms of a proposed consent decree, the FTC will require Take-Two and Rockstar going forward to clearly disclose all content relevant to a game's rating on its packaging. The companies must also set up a content review system to spare the gaming public additional servings of Hot Coffee. Finally, the companies agreed that they would be subject to fines of up to $11,000 per game sold if they commit such violations in the future.

Essentially, the FTC is saying, "Don't do it again."

Oy.

Talk about a no-win situation.

They couldn't make a public statement saying "here's our M-rated game, but please don't do -this-, as that will invalidate the ESRB rating by granting access to the AO-rated content", because, well...yeah, don't need to explain that.

They couldn't literally REMOVE the AO content, assuming my understanding of the material is accurate. That is, the blur is not being applied to pre-rendered footage, but to certain portions of the live gameplay (if the blur is being applied to pre-rendered footage, then R* are indeed colossal jackasses and deserve any flack they get over this, but I don't think that's the case).

They couldn't deny it, because 1. that's not the right thing to do, and 2. look how well that turned out the last time.

Unfortunately, because of how it turned out last time, no one is going to bother listening to them, let alone taking the time to understand, that this is indeed a different situation.

Hot Coffee, they straight up failed. This time, while I really have very little sympathy for them on the whole for what they do to the industry's image, I do feel that they more or less did what they were supposed to.

Also, this in no way invalidates the ESRB. If anything it just means that R* needs to be slapped upside the head a few times (harder than for HC).

Damn right R* and the ESRB should be held responsible for my illegal action toward the game in order to get rid of the filter! Do you have any idea what they've made me put myself through voluntarily? Those bastards are going down. While we're on the subject, I think they should be responsible for all illegal drugs I did before playing the game in order to make Manhunt 2 enjoyable

@Parallax Abstraction

This time it's not really Rockstar's fault. Hot Coffee was (they made numerous errors in the way they handled that). But there is NO way to make a game inherently unhackable.

Now there is the possibility that the ESRB lowered the rating for another reason OTHER than the blurring and flashing...

Oh goody. JT's back and already saying the ESRB is at fault. What gets me is that JT expects the ESRB to try and hack the game in order to see if they can find banned content, or at least know about this option. I'm betting the ESRB had no clue that this content would be 'hack'able.

Here's another interesting thing I've noticed. JT hasn't said one word yet about how ebil Rockstar is for having left this code in the game that could be hacked. Is this just because JT can't say anything bad about Rockstar and T2 or their lawyers will hit him in the face with that lawsuit agreement where T2 said they wouldn't throw JT to the wolves if he'd not stir up stuff about the way they do stuff?

You think T2 would make sure this wouldn't happen, again. Seriously, if anyone's to blame this time, T2 looks like the one folks should be complaining about and too. Leave the poor ESRB folks alone.

who cares? how many kids are going own manhunt on psp, let alone have the skill to hack their psp and go through the code to unlock the material. only adults are going to be able to do this so why care?

@ Parallax Abstraction

To be fair, this is different from Hot Coffee. This isn't leaving material on the disk that could be accessed by hacking. This is hackers DISABLING code that IS supposed to be there. The content being modified by the code isn't something that could just be up and deleted from the disk.

Dear Moron Jabrwock:

Since you think I'm dense, try this out, Ace:

I said if they didn't tell the ESRB then that's bad. Why should we believe T2 on any of this, as to whom they told, etc. The ESRB has yet to talk.

As I earlier noted, if the ESRB did know about the leaving in of this stuff, then that's even worse for the industry, because they're the clowns that are supposed to make sure this can't happen!

Don't you get it? The watchdog may be complicit in this! The bottom line is that these games are going to have to be recalled. Just watch.

The reality is that Sony are as much to blame as R* is because they made the PSP, and it got hacked.

The real reality is that this is the work of outside coders who have changed the game.

It is like taking the safety off of a gun, shooting someone, then suing the gun maker because the safety was modified.

You know what just occured to me? This is on the PSP. A 2.5 inch screen, right? OMFG you can see detail on a 2.5 inch screen?

Call me when the Wii/PS2 version is hacked.
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

@ Jabrwock
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Who's responsible for crappy Netflix performance on Verizon?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sleaker@MP - Looked up hitbox, thanks.07/24/2014 - 9:40pm
Matthew WilsonI agree, but to me given other known alternatives google seems to the the best option.07/24/2014 - 6:30pm
Andrew EisenTo be clear, I have no problem with Google buying it, I'm just concerned it will make a slew of objectively, quantifiably bad changes to Twitch just as it's done with YouTube over the years.07/24/2014 - 6:28pm
Matthew WilsonI doubt yahoo has the resources to pull it off, and I not just talking about money.07/24/2014 - 6:15pm
SleakerI wouldn't have minded a Yahoo purchase, probably would have been a better deal than Tumblr seeing as they paid the same for it...07/24/2014 - 6:13pm
MaskedPixelanteIt's the golden age of Hitbox, I guess.07/24/2014 - 6:08pm
Matthew Wilsonagain twitch was going to get bought. It was just who was going to buy it . Twitch was not even being able to handle the demand, so hey needed a company with allot of infrastructure to help them. I can understand why you would not want Google to buy it .07/24/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew Eisen"Google is better than MS or Amazon" Wow. Google, as I mentioned earlier, progressively makes almost everything worse and yet there are still two lesser options. Again, wow!07/24/2014 - 5:43pm
Andrew EisenI don't know. MS, in my experience, is about 50/50 on its products. It's either fine or it's unusable crap. Amazon, well... I've never had a problem buying anything from them but I don't use any of their products or services so I couldn't really say.07/24/2014 - 5:42pm
Matthew WilsonGoogle is better than MS or Amazon.07/24/2014 - 5:33pm
Sleaker@AE - I've never seen youtube as a great portal to interact with people from a comment perspective. like ever. The whole interface doesn't really promote that.07/24/2014 - 5:28pm
Andrew EisenNor I. From a content producer's perspective, almost every change Google implements makes the service more cumbersome to use. It's why I set up a Facebook fan page in the first place; it was becoming too difficult to connect with my viewers on YouTube.07/24/2014 - 4:50pm
Sleakerwonder if anyone is going to try and compete with google, I'm not a huge fan of the way they manage their video services.07/24/2014 - 4:41pm
Andrew EisenIt happened. Google bought Twitch. http://venturebeat.com/2014/07/24/googles-1b-purchase-of-twitch-confirmed-joins-youtube-for-new-video-empire/07/24/2014 - 4:28pm
MaskedPixelanteI hope Nintendo actually follows through with the DS Virtual Console, that sounds like it could be cool.07/24/2014 - 2:15pm
james_fudgePeople don't deny it persay, they bristle at the idea that it's a "problem" that nneds to be "fixed."07/24/2014 - 2:15pm
Papa MidnightRacism and Misogny are heavily prevalent in the gaming and online arena. Getting people to actually admit that, however...07/24/2014 - 11:42am
Papa MidnightThat very thing is somthing that anyone who has been subjected to racial-based targeting online could actually state that they've experienced.07/24/2014 - 11:41am
Papa MidnightPerfect example: "I have yet to talk to a man who has had to call a police officer due to a stalker, only to be told nothing can be done until they are physically assaulted."07/24/2014 - 11:40am
Papa MidnightNot that said communities are mutually exclusive. Even the very first comment on that last article equates women in the gaming industry with being the n-word. Despicable, aetestable, and (sadly enough) this is not an uncommon presence in either community.07/24/2014 - 11:35am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician