Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

From Hot Coffee To Warm Tea 129

Posted by Zonk
from the weak-sauce dept.
I've been avoiding posting about it, but Joystiq has a completely and utterly sane discussion of the non-story that is the Bully boy on boy kissing 'scandal'. Despite the ravings of Jack Thompson, the homosexual behavior in Bully was seen by the ESRB and is not the first game to feature such content. From the article: "The ESRB would be insane if they were bullied into giving an 'M' (Mature 17+) rating to Bully, as this story continues to gain traction in the mainstream press ... It would also force the ginormous Electronic Arts into the mix to defend the 'T' rated Sims. We're willing to wager that Electronic Arts, which has a Human Rights Campaign corporate equality index score of 88 and had transsexual game designer Danielle Bunten Berry on staff, will put up a good fight if challenged. Rockstar played this brilliantly, they slid in a topic that is controversial, but perfectly defensible, and those that would attack 'Warm Tea,' won't have an easy time of it compared to 'Hot Coffee.'" SFGate put up a thoughtful opinion piece / review of Bully this past weekend. If you're not familiar with the game, it's a great way to fully understand how there's really nothing to worry about here.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

From Hot Coffee To Warm Tea

Comments Filter:
  • by illegalcortex (1007791) on Monday October 30, 2006 @12:26PM (#16643087)
    Hot Coffee = male/female sex

    Hot Tea = male/male kissing

    Oh, the brits aren't going to like this one...
  • Bigotry (Score:2, Insightful)

    by APE992 (676540)
    Anyone who truely finds this offensive should be considered a bigot.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ultranova (717540)

      Anyone who truely finds this offensive should be considered a bigot.

      "Anyone who disagrees with me is a bigot".

      That's pretty much the definition of irony :).

      • Pointing out bigotry.. is not itself bigotry.

        But, don't let that stop you fucking asshats replying to the OP.

        • by ultranova (717540)

          Pointing out bigotry.. is not itself bigotry.

          According to dictionary.com, a "bigot" is "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion". Finding homosexuality offensive is an opinion (or possibly belief, if the opinion is based on religion). Being intolerant of other people's opinions is bigotry. Therefore, the OP's statement is in itself bigotry.

          That's the problem with being very tolerant of other people's values: how do you deal with people who are not tolerant ? Will

          • There's a gap in your reasoning! How is calling someone a bigot an act of intolerance? I don't recall the OP stating any intolerance or animosity toward bigots. Heck, the fellow could be the president of Save the Bigots for all we know. Your assumption shows that you think that bigotry is bad. Therefore, you are yourself a bigot!

            • Bigot.
            • by ultranova (717540)

              There's a gap in your reasoning! How is calling someone a bigot an act of intolerance? I don't recall the OP stating any intolerance or animosity toward bigots.

              The OP did, however, show intolerance towards people who find homosexuality offensive. Therefore, the OP fits the definition of a bigot - he's being intolerant of an idea - the idea that homosexuality is offensive or wrong.

              Unless, of course, one defines "bigotry" as opposing things I don't find wrong, in which case it quickly reduces down to "A

          • by Ender Ryan (79406)
            Wow, the idiocy knows no bounds, apparently.

            I'm going to draw up an analogy, since people *still* can't deal with homosexuality rationally.

            Instead of homosexuality, how about race?

            -Bully - a game developed by Rockstar that features black people.
            -People complain about there being black people in the game.

            OP: Anyone who finds it offensive(that the game features black people) should be considered a bigot.
            You: No, you're a bigot.
            Me: Bullshit. He was pointing out bigotry, doesn't make him a bigot.
            You: Blah blah
            • by rts008 (812749)
              Damn- I hate to see you go down in flames here.

              This is /., you needed to use a bad car analogy to prove your point.

              The slashtrolls will not work with you here- give us a bad car analogy we can pick apart for about 3 or 4 hundred comments.

              This reminds me; Are you new here?

              LOL!- I get your point, just had to point out the obvious.
            • I feel like I'm in an episode of Southpark.


              OP: Anyone who finds it offensive(that the game features black people) should be considered a bigot.
              You: No, you're a bigot.
              Me: Bullshit. He was pointing out bigotry, doesn't make him a bigot.

              Cartman: Shut up Jew.

    • Bigot or not, people are still entitled to a point of view. If you are intolerant of intolerance, are you any better than them?
      • by EzraSj (993720)
        Bigot or not, people are still entitled to a point of view. If you are intolerant of intolerance, are you any better than them?
        Yes, you are. There is a marked difference between being intolerant of someone's natural sexuality (or rather any quality they are born with) and being intolerant of fools. Are you trying to tell me there is a moral error in condemning the KKK?
        • by elrous0 (869638) *
          There is a marked difference between being intolerant of someone's natural sexuality (or rather any quality they are born with) and being intolerant of fools.

          What if they're born fools?

          -Eric

          • by rts008 (812749)
            "What if they're born fools?"

            Then take 'em out back of the woodshed an' drown their unwanted asses.
            That's what has got us in the mess we are in now- no way to "cull the herd" like used to happen in the world.

            That's what society and civilization will get you- no ability to cull the herd, and the inferiors take over.

            Damn, did I say that out loud?....Oh shit! here comes the MODS!!!! run fer yer lives!
      • The GP did not suggest that we be intolerant of bigots. It seems only fair that bigots wear any stigma attached to the label 'bigot'—they earned it and who are we to deprive them of their just desserts?

    • by n2art2 (945661)
      More so I would say that those who do sway to the preference of same sex relations and who promote such lifestyles, tend to have more of a bigotry towards those who hold a moral stance to heterosexual relations.

      If Bigot is to mean:

      "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

      Then I would say that both extreme sides would be called bigots. . .

      as well as hypocrites. Let me explain:

      A hypocrite is one who says one things but then do

      • More so I would say that those who do sway to the preference of same sex relations and who promote such lifestyles, tend to have more of a bigotry towards those who hold a moral stance to heterosexual relations.

        Just plain wrong. You cannot possibly make a correlation about an entire group of people based on your personal beliefs. This is the same as saying all followers of Islam are terrorists. Simply not true. Period.

        Same-sex relations leftist. . . . Says they believe in diversity, yet in practic
        • by n2art2 (945661)
          Please realize that I am talking about 2 extremes, and if you read the ending you will realize that I personally fall nearer to the middle of the road then either extreme. I am merely pointing out that both extremes tend to think the extreme about the opposite in general. If you try and understand me I'm saying that all should be a little more willing to meet in the middle. But you seem to have made sweeping speculation about me.

          What you call same-sex relations leftists do believe in diversity, and in

          • You want equal rights, yet things like BET are ok, but there would be an uproar if there was the opposing station of WET. Everyone is selfish, that's human nature also. I would dare say that a White Heterosexual Male has less rights then any other humanity group, at least in the USA that is.

            We do have WET, its pretty much every other station on TV. Being a white hetero male, I haven't run into any less rights than anyone else I know, minority or otherwise.

            Or how about wanting Federal support for Homo
    • Re:Bigotry (Score:4, Insightful)

      by HappySqurriel (1010623) on Monday October 30, 2006 @04:59PM (#16648195)
      Anyone who truely finds this offensive should be considered a bigot.

      I'm personally going to disagree with you mainly because I think the type of statement you're making undermines the freedom of speech (and religion) that western society is based on; it is the type of statement that prevents open (and honest) discussion on any subject and is just as damaging as "Anyone who rejects this videogame violence bill condones child abuse" or "If you oppose our participation in Afganistan you don't support our troops.".

      Personally I don't find the content in the game offensive but saying that someone who does is a bigot is pretty extreme. Maybe my education was poor, but I was always lead to believe that biggotry had to do with someone being intolerant towards another group. Now Tolerance (inspite of some people's opinion) does not mean to embrace something, it means to put up with; if your parents said they would tolerate the person you choose to marry you'd probably get very angry.

      I will try to make what I'm saying more clear ...

      Suppose you started working in a cubical next to someone who came from the gym every morning and dried their work-out gear in the open; being that they only wash this gear on the weekend by wednesday it smells pretty funky and on friday it smells like a dead animal. Now if your boss told you to "tolerate" it does that mean that you have to stop being offended by the smell of the sweaty workout stuff?

      In a similar fashion, someone who disagrees with (or is offended by) Homosexuality is not necessarily a bigot; it depends on how they act on it that would define whether they were a bigot or not.
      • by EzraSj (993720)
        The nature of intolerance isn't what makes it bad - everything you say about the idea of tolerance is of course correct. The problem is with the content - in this case, the ridiculous idea that it is somehow ok to be "offended" by a persons natural sexuality. Its as ridiculous as being offended by a persons race.

        In a similar fashion, someone who disagrees with (or is offended by) Homosexuality is not necessarily a bigot; it depends on how they act on it that would define whether they were a bigot or not

        • by elrous0 (869638) *
          the ridiculous idea that it is somehow ok to be "offended" by a persons natural sexuality.

          Taking a shit is a natural act too. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be offended if someone dropped trow and took a big dump right in front of me.

          Some "natural acts" belong in a private setting, including tonsil hockey (be it between Adam and Eve or Adam and Steve).

          -Eric

          • by EzraSj (993720)

            Some "natural acts" belong in a private setting, including tonsil hockey (be it between Adam and Eve or Adam and Steve).

            ....Which isn't really what we're talking about. If that were the case, then this would really be a non issue, since the game also includes 'tonsil hockey' between girls and boys - the double standard is the problem. Also, my post contained the term "natural qualities" not "natural acts" - nice switch job there. What I'm talking about are natural conditions. To use your analogy, the vie

            • Homosexuality...natural??? What a twisted view of reality. It's a choice. It's not something one has no control over. You don't screw corpses or molest children and call it natural, or do you? Where would you decide to draw a line on justifying your behavior? How long will it be until something even more outrageous is the next issue people will demand to be treated equally over? How many years would it take to degenerate to such a level? Go back 50 years and imagine trying this current trendy argume
      • by KiahZero (610862)
        It's really rather simple. The people who are offended by this are only offended because the main character is kissing a male. They are not similarly offended when the main character kisses a female. Therefore, they are discriminating on the basis of sex, which makes them sexist.

        Perhaps if a person doesn't like being called a bigot, they should work to get rid of the attitudes that make them one, rather than complaining about the label?
      • by dangitman (862676)
        I'm personally going to disagree with you mainly because I think the type of statement you're making undermines the freedom of speech (and religion) that western society is based on;

        How so? They are free to express their offense at seeing computer-generated characters kiss. Others are free to call them bigots for saying that. That's all free speech. It's not like anybody is censoring them. In fact, it's usually that kind of person who wants things like this censored.

        it is the type of statement that preve

    • by tprime (673835)
      That hasn't stopped current legistlation from being passed. If we can support bigotry through legislation, the powers that be can certainly condemn a game that supports the hated minority du jour....

      It is somewhat interesting though, that this is coming out around the same time as US mid term elections.
  • by B3ryllium (571199)
    It's like a corporate Poison Pill for Jack Thompson. Nee-chay!
  • It should be interesting to see how this plays out because videogame content is under attack from both extremes of the political spectrum and on each side you should see the complete opposite reaction; on the socially progressive side the argument will be that anyone who doesn't support this is a caveman and the socially conservative side will see this as a continued destruction of the moral core of America.

    In general you could have infighting and loss of respect between these two groups and it should be in
    • Oh, never underestimate the power of social "progressives" to find things to despise about videogames. And I'd wager this will pass beneath the notice of many social conservatives, who these days tend to only notice things that come in the form of movies or television. Videogames are assumed to be inherently evil, like music or books.

      Remarkably, it does seem to be the "left" that focuses on tearing down videogames ... which is just silly, if you think about it. Liberalism is supposed to emphasize being

      • by KDR_11k (778916)
        What makes you think the left are liberals? Left is socialism, i.e. wanting the government to look out for the people. Liberalism is pretty much the opposite, wanting the government to stay out of everything and giving all power to the rich (which is what happens when you let money be the deciding power) rather than the elected.
  • Is there anything Rockstar won't do to attract a little press attention?
    • Thats the point. If I created and wanted to market a game, I would spend a few days programming and animating in something contraversal like this to use the current (and foolish) political climate for for advertisment. Constantly offended people need to realise that: a. Nobody "normal" cares, and b. They are helping the product/idea/art they are trying to ban.
      • If I created and wanted to market a game, I would spend a few days programming and animating in something contraversal like this to use the current (and foolish) political climate for for advertisment.

        So the only thing missing in a game in which you have to beat up kids is controversy... Hmm... Yeah, kissing ought to fill that gap!

        • by dryriver (1010635)
          It is rather funny that two polygon characters kissing stirs up more controversy than people raining artillery strikes down on other players in the likes of BF2. Oh well. That's gaming for you.
          • by PriceIke (751512)
            Did I miss something? The Sims has had "homosexuality" in the game for over 6 years. Players could actually encourage their Sims to pair up with same-sex Sims and fall in love, kiss, etc. if they wanted. I do not remember any huge controversy about that. I don't know if that is available in Sims 2 or not, but why wouldn't it be? Why is this a big deal?
      • by KDR_11k (778916)
        They didn't make additional programming, they just didn't make the kiss action check the gender of the target. And why would they, a game that tells you "it's bad to kiss boys" when you try to do that would be worse than a game that just does what you tell it.
    • Both Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic and Jade Empire contained homosexuality. In the case of Star Wars: KOTOR it was fairly tame, with the female Jedi Juhani confessing she was in love with you, and you could agree to discuss it after the mission was over. Jade Empire was more unabashed, with the female or male NPC having the option to make a member of the same sex fall in love with them. Although in both cases, whereas the heterosexual kiss was a full on face-plant, if you'd fallen for a character o
      • I think the same type of thing was present in Fable, too. I never experienced it, but I thought I may have read about it at one point.
        • Yeah fable had the same thing. In fable and sims 2 it dosent matter if the character is male or female, the only thing that changes is the model and the voice over used, otherwise two characters behave in exactly the same way, so the main character can woe characters of either sex, propose and other what. Plus you could also get completely smashed and proceed to puke ones guts out. But it also had an M rating, so thats probably the reason it didnt catch as much flak or would work for a comparison.
      • by nomadic (141991)
        And Origin beat Bioware; anyone remember the gypsies in Ultima 6?
      • Long before KOTOR, remember Fallout 2? Not only are there gay sexual encounters, there's actually the possibility of a gay wedding. In fact, a gay shotgun wedding. And, later on, a gay divorce.
      • Isn't Bully from Rockstar Vancouver and isn't Bioware based in Edmonton? I guess Canadians are leaders in the production of homosexual video game content!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "Is there anything Rockstar won't do to attract a little press attention?"

      If Jack Thompson wasn't such an asshat, Rockstar wouldn't be able to have something as simple as a boy-kisses-boy feature in the game to attract press attention.
      • It is starting to look more and more like maybe Jack Thompson is some kind of plant. It's not unlike the theory that the Westborough Baptist Church was actually founded to raise sympathy for homosexuals -- they're so ridiculously over-the-top that it gets easier and easier to hang on to the suspiscion that they're not for real.
        • by nuzak (959558)
          Much as Westboro Baptist Church seems an agent provocateur, I really doubt that anyone would or could keep up that kind of front for year after year. These folks live in a walled compound, and they're so closed off that they're actually starting to inbreed. No one goes that far as an act.
          • These folks live in a walled compound, and they're so closed off that they're actually starting to inbreed. No one goes that far as an act.

            I dunno, I guess it would depend how hot my cousin was...
        • by Chris Burke (6130)
          Yeah, and Jack was also payed by 2 Live Crew to give that band ten times more media exposure than their craptacular act ever deserved.

          You don't need a conspiracy theory to explain it. Jack Thompson is really only about promoting one thing: Himself. Being "that crazy idiot who hates profane hip-hop/violent video games" has kept his name in headlines for well over a decade now, when otherwise nobody would know or care anything about "that useless lawyer that never wins any cases". The fact that the target
  • Yeesh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) on Monday October 30, 2006 @12:34PM (#16643217)
    SFGate put up a thoughtful opinion piece / review of Bully this past weekend. If you're not familiar with the game, it's a great way to fully understand how there's really nothing to worry about here.


    I bought the game last week. I haven't found the boy you can kiss. So far, though, my impression is that the 'controversy' here is laughable at best. When you target people options appear indicating what you can do with them. With some females, for example, you can profess your attraction to them and potentially woo them into smooching. My guess is that there's a boy floating around you can walk up and the heart icon will appear. Wee. Polish those pitchforks. /sarcasm

    I have to be honest: I think it's more controversial that Bully is described as having 'gay sexual content that deserves a higher rating' than it is to have the option to kiss a boy in the game. Nice little double-standard there.

     
    • Re:Yeesh (Score:5, Funny)

      by bunions (970377) on Monday October 30, 2006 @12:51PM (#16643435)
      > Polish those pitchforks.

      Stop that, you'll go blind!
    • I found the guy you could kiss, though I opted not to introduce that, uhh, predilection into play. It's one of the aquamarine sweater-wearing guys, though I can't remember his name.
      • by StocDred (691816)
        There's a couple guys you can kiss... probably one with each faction, I would guess. My boytoy is Trent, one of the bullying bastards who endlessly hassles you in the game's first chapter. Irony.

        But really, it's just for the life-up, I swear!

    • by C0R1D4N (970153)
      His name is Trent, he wears white shirt and jeans and has blonde hair. Generally picks on the nerds, target him and talk to him he'll usually say something like "Wanna play shirts and skins?" Unfortunately the unlock from Art class that lets you kiss for health bonus without having to give over gifts doesn't work on him. He always wants stuff. I wouldn't think us gays would be more materialistic than women =p
  • THAT... is funny.
  • They didn't have a release for anything other than Sony PS2, so I won't be buying it.

    Oh well, not my loss...I just won't be buying it at all. :)
  • I haven't played Bully, so I'm speculating wildly here, but here's my assumption:

    There's a "kiss" button combination, so if you stand in front of a girl and press it, you grab her and you kiss.

    Now, what happens if you stand in front of a boy and press the same buttons?

    It seems to me that if anything different happens, the developers have to explain why they're discriminating against homosexuality. The only fair and balanced thing to do is for the engine to treat boys and girls alike.

    The only remaining quest
    • wrong, I'm afraid.

      there is an action item that appears when you move close enough to someone. Depending on the target, different actions appear. Usually for males in the game, the kiss icon is replaced by a 'friendly chat' icon. For females, the kiss icon only appears after you've given them chocolate or flowers (greedy cows!).

      so you can't even try and kiss someone who isn't "available" accoring to the developers.
    • "There's a "kiss" button combination, so if you stand in front of a girl and press it, you grab her and you kiss."

      Not exactly. You have 'positive' and 'negative' button pushes. With most guys, if you walk up and hit the positive one, he'll say "whassup?" and the dude'll either say something nice back or insult you. With the femmes, you'll say something like "You sure are pretty!", and if that works, you have the option to give them flowers. I haven't bumped into the gay student yet, but I imagine it wor
  • I seriously clicked on this article to read about some Slashdotter switching from caffinated coffee to tea, and the experience he/she went through. I read and now see it's about virtual boy on boy action.

    I wonder which situation would actually make more of an impact on the typical Slashdotter. =p
  • by ConfusedSelfHating (1000521) on Monday October 30, 2006 @02:28PM (#16645209)
    Very few people want homosexual content in their games. There will be quite a number of people who were going to buy Bully and now they won't. The vast majority of heterosexual males are disgusted with homosexuality. This isn't something that liberals want to hear, but it's true. This is about forcing something on the consumer that they don't want. The standard reaction of the consumer is not to buy it.

    I'll give a non-homosexual example of where my digust for something made me regret a purchase. I watch a lot of movies in the theater. The movie Beloved had come out and I decided to go see it. There was one scene I was repulsed by. Oprah Winfrey urinating. God, I hope that was faked. It wasn't her sitting down and doing her business ... it was an arc of urine coming out from beneath her dress.

    So I don't like watching homosexuals kiss or watching Oprah pee. If a media product comes out which includes either, I will not purchase it.
    • Very few people want homosexual content in their games.

      I point you in the direction of the multitude of patches for Baldur's Gate 2 that remove the gender restrictions on the romance subplots, and laugh in your face. Then I point you in the direction of Fallout 2, in which absolutely everybody in the game seems to be bi (at least for my 17-year-old female with high charisma and the Sex Appeal perk, anyway). And laugh in your face again. And I, for one, am always game for more of that sort of thing.

      Perha

    • by Chris Burke (6130)
      Very few people want homosexual content in their games. There will be quite a number of people who were going to buy Bully and now they won't. The vast majority of heterosexual males are disgusted with homosexuality. This isn't something that liberals want to hear, but it's true. This is about forcing something on the consumer that they don't want. The standard reaction of the consumer is not to buy it.

      If it was a game where homo-smooches were a major component, you might almost have a point. But this is o
    • The Sims and The Sims 2 were two of the all-time best sellig games in history, and you can do all sorts of things w/ same-sex interactions. Hasn't seemed to have an impact on sales one bit.

      (Somewhat related: Jack Thompson also thinks that Sims 2 is a pedophile's dream-come-true, as well, since you can remove the pixel blur for children and even apply third-party skins with teh boobies! Somebody please think of the virtual children!!!)

    • The vast majority of heterosexual males are disgusted with homosexuality. This isn't something that liberals want to hear, but it's true. This is about forcing something on the consumer that they don't want. The standard reaction of the consumer is not to buy it.

      My counter-suggestion, similarly based on wild conjecture, is that most people care much less than you do. For reference: well, anything popular that has homosexuality in it somewhere. Take your pick.

      I think that the arena of armchair hypothes
      • I'm not saying that Bully should be banned. But there should be full disclosure of homosexual content. This would allow gamers and parents buying games for their children to make a fully informed decision. Just as Gears of War should have a label stating "intense bloody violence" on it. I like games with brutal violence, but I understand that many people don't. If Mario suddenly ripped off Luigi's head and started raping the eye sockets, there are many people who would be unpleasantly surprised.

        My co

        • by RsG (809189)

          I'm not saying that Bully should be banned. But there should be full disclosure of homosexual content.

          Being in the news (as in TFA) isn't full disclosure? Given how many idiot parents can't seem to read the ESRB labels, I'd say having this in the news will alert more people to the "objectionable" content than any label would.

          If Mario suddenly ripped off Luigi's head and started raping the eye sockets

          ...then the game would get a AO rating, and nobody would stock it. How many hetai games can you buy at your

        • Most people don't want to watch a movie in which a gay James Bond sleeps with a bunch of guys while preventing the Earth from imploding.

          Hmm, well "Spy Boy" did lead to the sequel "Spy Boy 2", but yeah, that was a rather limited audience...

    • This is about forcing something on the consumer that they don't want.

      Ohnoes! You can optionally kiss a boy! Now that I know I can offer flowers to a boy in the game, I simply can't resist, I'm somehow compelled by the homosexual agenda! I'm being forced get flowers, to track down a gay character, and offer the flowers to that character! Help, help, I'm being oppressed!

      Meanwhile in reality, the gay kiss isn't "forced" on the player any more than the straight kissing also possible in the game is forced

      • Ohnoes! You can optionally kiss a boy! Now that I know I can offer flowers to a boy in the game, I simply can't resist, I'm somehow compelled by the homosexual agenda! I'm being forced get flowers, to track down a gay character, and offer the flowers to that character! Help, help, I'm being oppressed!

        The same thing happened to me.

        Here is a flower.
        @}----
        So, uh, do you want to go get some dinner?
    • You are almost certainly correct that this will cost the company some sales. Of course, with so many games allowing homosexual behaviour these days (e.g., all games with multi-player options that allow some freedom of avatar interaction and/or interactive chat amongst players), die-hard bigots have few games to choose from these days.

      Even if you are correct that "very few people want homosexual content in their games", that number (and the number of extra customers that the company will gain through the in

    • by ALeavitt (636946) *
      What about a game where you have the freedom to commit both heterosexual and homosexual acts? Isn't that better, and ultimately more freeing, than a game that allows a Kiss command on characters but grays it out for some? This is much like the complaint lobbied against GTA that it rewards players for random violence against civilians and whores. While it allows that violence, it could hardly be said that it rewards it. It simply allows the player the freedom to do what he wants. If the player were to try to
    • by Mwongozi (176765)

      This is about forcing something on the consumer that they don't want.

      Rubbish. You, the player, are given the choice of kissing another boy in the game. If that offends you... don't!

    • by dangitman (862676)
      The vast majority of heterosexual males are disgusted with homosexuality.

      Those guys tend to be repressed gays. They have a fascination with homosexuality, which is why they feel "disgusted." It's actually latent attraction.

      After all, why would a heterosexual guy dislike homosexuality? It means there are more women to go around!

  • I think I brought this up in a Hot Coffee thread a long time ago, and I'm stating it here again because I didn't notice that anyone else had done so yet.

    Long ago, SimCopter included an unplanned easter egg that featured semi-nude male NPCs running around kissing. The guy who included it in the game--it wasn't planned or discussed with the rest of the team, it seems--was fired supposedly for the unauthorized inclusion, not for its content. That, at least, is how I understood what happened.

    Now, nobody r
    • No, it was because SimCopter wasn't a very popular game. And, once they discovered the 'easter egg', which wasn't long after release, they patched it so only the early versions of the game include this--as apposed to millions of versions of gta.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      No, he got fired because it's a WCB violation to be around whirring blades without adequate safety equipment.

      Never mind getting "caught" in the rotor - all characters have to wear reflective vests and helmets when near working helicopters.
    • Part of that was also because the graphics literally made it difficult to tell just what was happening. I played a lot of Sim Copter, and I didn't realize I was looking at gay men in thongs kissing each other until I read about it later on. They just kind of looked like blobs.
  • First, there's nothing wrong with being gay.

    There's also nothing wrong with being a lazy programmer. (If you make games.)

    So let's suppose you've got to create a sprite for your game. You like the girls better, so you code them first. There's nothing wrong with that. I can relate. You've then got to create a matching set of male characters.

    Do you:
    1. Create all the male characters from scratch?

    2. Copy the female characters into the male directory, reuse a lot of the code like the gestures, dialog options, fri
    • Hardly accidental; there are several lines of voiceover dialog for it. Those voice actors don't just say random lines (yet... Tom Baker (Dr. Who) did a mammoth recording session for British Telecom which you can get him to say anything in text to speech, but AFAIK all modern games use prerecorded lines rather than phonemes).

The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.

Working...