How is including the download code in the box not including it in the game? Or did you mean on the disk itself? To me it amounts to the same thing, and I don't really get why it's such a horrible thing when it's free.AkJay said:Fuckin' A, it's just like with DA:O, the DLC SHOULD HAVE been included in the actual fucking game, pretty soon we'll be doing a pay-to-play, where you have to pay for every hour's worth of game.
Everything before this is unimportantAndronicus said:... titties for the world, I say!
The sad thing is, this is the first thing I thought of too.SimuLord said:"so one would assume that there will be many opportunities for this content to pay double D dividends."
So it would pay DDividends?
Same here , man! I mean there's a load of decent Irish voice actors knocking about the UK and the states , hell what about the dude that played Atlas in Bioshock?.hazabaza1 said:Wow, really? They're sure desperate for sales.
Personally, ever since I heard that horrifying terrible "Irish" accent, it put me off the game.
Possibly. But I doubt Fox News, and the other anti-gaming sociopaths, or the judges, will understand (or more accurately for Fox, choose to understand) the difference. Still, we'll see what occurs. Hopefully, I'm just being overly pessimistic over this.samsonguy920 said:The difference between these two is the hot coffee mod was already part of the code on the GTA:SA disc, anybody with the knowhow could alter the code to implement it without any downloads.* With Saboteur, the actual nudity is not included in the game, for nipples you actually need to download the code. I don't know the ESRB's stance on DLC, but good odds EA makes an effort to cover their ass on this, either throwing a disclaimer with the DLC, or even have the ESRB throw in their two cents.Doug said:I strongly disagree. GTA: SA didn't even give the option of launching the Hot Coffee content, and it required an external modification of the game to achieve, and yet they still got utterly hammered by the ban-happy folks and the people who think parents can't look after their own kids....well, in America anyways. I believe the BBFC's response can be summed up with a shrug and a 'meh'.Greg Tito said:By making nudity something that each consumer must choose to display, however, EA deftly sidesteps the issue. Ostensibly, anyone who is able to purchase games and downloadable content from XBLA or PSN is old enough to have a credit card and therefore old enough to decide if they want to see virtual boobs. Of course, that still doesn't prevent some parent crying foul because they never set up parental controls or let their kids have their credit card number. In any case, it is a clever attempt by EA to offer adult content if you jump through an "age gate."
*:[small]I wonder if Rockstar leaked the info, or what the person who first discovered the code was really looking for.[/small]
The only trouble GTA:SA ended up in was because the content was left on the disc and was never mentioned or reviewed by the ESRB. The problem wasn't necessarily that there was nudity or sex, but that they didn't disclose it, and then denied it. The ESRB takes their ratings very seriously, and if you try to pull something over on them they can and will hit you with a huge fine and/or refuse to rate your games (which means most retailers won't touch them).Doug said:I strongly disagree. GTA: SA didn't even give the opinion of launching the Hot Coffee content, and it required an external modification of the game to achieve, and yet they still got utterly hammered by the ban-happy folks ...
The DLC apparently enables a nudity toggle in the options menu (and probably turns it on). If you don't have the DLC, the toggle to turn on/off nudity is stuck in the off position. If you get the DLC, you can set it to whatever you prefer.Doug said:Well, it says the uncovered boobies AND extra hiding places and stuff; so, in order to get the extra stuff, I have to have the uncovered boobs?
So apparently Russ is a 'boobs' guy.Russ Pitts said:This ... is GENIUS!