Hot Coffee anyone

[mikeszekely]

Heh, thanks for going at length with me on this JB0 and Mike. Swell of ya.

Hey, it beats posting in the Shadow Force thread...

I know I said different before, but JB0 is officially banned from ever using the "quote" or "bold" functions again! LOL (Mike is a close runner up).

Hey, at least all my quotes are in quotes.

[Druna Skass]

Maybe I'm throwing gasoline on a fire with this one, but are there any good reasons out there why games obviously aimed at older people shouldn't have nudity in them? An M rating is essentialy equivalant to an R rating in movies and I've seen some pretty damn graphic things in movies like The Devil's Advocate. So why shouldn't M rated games be allowed to have seens as graphic as the ones in movies?

[JB0]

I know I said different before, but JB0 is officially banned from ever using the "quote" or "bold" functions again! LOL (Mike is a close runner up).

Hey, at least all my quotes are in quotes.

315046[/snapback]

Patch the board to support more tags and mine will be too.

[azrael]

The patch won't be out for a while. Sorry.

Maybe I'm throwing gasoline on a fire with this one, but are there any good reasons out there why games obviously aimed at older people shouldn't have nudity in them? An M rating is essentialy equivalant to an R rating in movies and I've seen some pretty damn graphic things in movies like The Devil's Advocate. So why shouldn't M rated games be allowed to have seens as graphic as the ones in movies?

Because, unfortunately, people tend to see games, in general, as stuff for kids. Movies are treated differently due to culture and yadda yadda yadda. The last time I walked into a EB Games store, what did I see? Some kids, some mature people, and some kids with their parents. Although I haven't been to a TRU in almost...2 years the last time I was there, they were selling the console games along with the kid's stuff in there. You have to provide a clear distinction between games and toys. For now, I just don't see that because this culture associates games with toys. Of course, you can sit here and think about the why, how, and what, but that's one possible reason and a overview of your answer.

[Sundown]

The quote ninja will never be slowed down.

...

Well, as soon as Invision fixes the 10 quote tag limit...

Is that what the problem is? Boo.

Actually, new routines often ARE implemented and inserted, such as variable-width fonts.

And deciphering the "file format" can involve an awful lot of work.

Unless it's compressed. That mucks everything up.

Also note that when working with a ROM image, there's no clear delineation between data and code, and they can in fact be intermingled.

Hey, never said any of it was simple. But it's doable enough that it's done with regularity. Compression is a doozy, but there are ways to crack it. And while data might be intermingled on a ROM, an experienced hacker can still figure out whether he's looking at data or looking at code.

But all this magickery still doesn't compare to inserting the scads of new instructions, routines, and artwork needed to create the sort of stuff we're talking about into an existing binary. Which is why you don't see it done often or at all.

As does the data in your typical console game.

A binary file is a little like a datafile where every chunk of data can point anywhere else in the file, with several ways of choosing where it points at any turn, where the data can modify itself, and where there's no structure, rhyme, reason, repeatability, or pattern you can confidently rely on to tell where you even are. In addition, most of the values being changed will render the program useless, and if you so much as move the data chunks around in order to accompany new instructions, they break.

Data files, console or otherwise, aren't nearly as indecipherable as the series of opcodes that make up binary executables. Seriously. It's not even the same thing.

And a ROM image is nothing but uncommented assembly code.

Not all of a ROM consists of assembly opcodes in whatever machine language the game is compiled for. Like you say, some of it is data. Data formats can be cracked much more easily than the assembly instructions can be changed, moved around, and pointers and addresses recalculated to accompany changes and additional instructions-- and data is what ROM hackers are mostly working with, if I understand you right. This is why you don't see new minigames being made with regularity by ROM hackers, or on any platform for that matter where the none of the game's code is readable, either in script or uncompiled form. And what changes you do see are little confined changes that can be accomplished by reasonably straightforward methodologies, like say translations.

Even in your experience with console modders, you can see that changes to assembly code and inherent functionality have always been extremely minor. Poke a bit here, change one instruction to skip over a whole series of instructions there to bypass a CD check. But changes to data files are widespread in comparison and almost the entire domain of modding, at least for those games that don't have SDKs or expose their mechanics through scripting. There's a reason for that.

And as Mike pointed out, God of War contains content in the actual game that's more graphic than anything GTA has, but got an M anyways.

So it appears disabled clothes sex is more offensive than enabled nekkid sex.

*shrugs*

Is God of War's minigame really that naughty?

-Al

[Pat Payne]

Their intent seems completely non-malicious. 

I never said they were being malicious. I just think that they went overboard in their CYA mode by blaming the hackers rather than owning up to the fact that the content was on the disc. They realized they had either a potential PR nightmare (or a potential word-of-mouth windfall) on their hands, and so they were tryign to minimize the fallout from it. No malice, just tunnel-vision, IMHO.

To make an analogy, this is the same as having a kid find a hidden Playboy in a locked box hidden deep in a basement.  The Playboy requires intent and significant skill to get at and was obviously not intended to be shown to a child.  Would such a person be considered guilty?

But to have a complete analogy, you'd also have to add that the person at first says "That Playboy's not mine...some burglar must have broken in and left that box during the middle of the night..." and that's where IMHO, they are culpable. Not that the content was there, but that they didn't have enough integrity to acknowledge that it was there until someone painted them into a corner and forced them to admit it.

Edited July 28, 2005 by Pat Payne

[mikeszekely]

Is God of War's minigame really that naughty?

Yes and no.

The optional minigame itself might not be considered as bad, since the action is taking place off camera. The mechanics are the same, in that you're using the analog stick to get in the rhythm, but to goal is actually to knock a vase of the table beside the bed.

However, it seems that everyone in San Andreas retains, at the minimum, lingerie at all times. In God of War, you will encounter several topless female characters, often in gorgeously rendered and totally unskippable cut scenes.

[JB0]

The quote ninja will never be slowed down.

...

Well, as soon as Invision fixes the 10 quote tag limit...

Is that what the problem is? Boo.

Seconded.

BOO INVISION!

Actually, new routines often ARE implemented and inserted, such as variable-width fonts.

And deciphering the "file format" can involve an awful lot of work.

Unless it's compressed. That mucks everything up.

Also note that when working with a ROM image, there's no clear delineation between data and code, and they can in fact be intermingled.

Hey, never said any of it was simple.  But it's doable enough that it's done with regularity.  Compression is a doozy, but there are ways to crack it.  And while data might be intermingled on a ROM, an experienced hacker can still figure out whether he's looking at data or looking at code.

Regularity is debatable. There's some games that people've been poking at for a few years.

Like this one.

But all this magickery still doesn't compare to inserting the scads of new instructions, routines, and artwork needed to create the sort of stuff we're talking about into an existing binary.  Which is why you don't see it done often or at all.

Most extensive (visible) change I can think of in a translation hack so far consisted of a completely new text display routine, because the original game used vertical text.

As does the data in your typical console game.

A binary file is a little like a datafile where every chunk of data can point anywhere else in the file, with several ways of choosing where it points at any turn, where the data can modify itself, and where there's no structure, rhyme, reason, repeatability, or pattern you can confidently rely on to tell where you even are.  In addition, most of the values being changed will render the program useless, and if you so much as move the data chunks around in order to accompany new instructions, they break.

Data files, console or otherwise, aren't nearly as indecipherable as the series of opcodes that make up binary executables.  Seriously.  It's not even the same thing.

Actually, it is.

ROM hackers don't just yank the japanese and replace it with english.

...

Well, they used to, but that was when the "scene" was in its infancy.

Now they expand the ROM to make room for a decent translation, hack in new compression schemes, variable width font routines, etc.

And a ROM image is nothing but uncommented assembly code.

Not all of a ROM consists of assembly opcodes in whatever machine language the game is compiled for.  Like you say, some of it is data.  Data formats can be cracked much more easily than the assembly instructions can be changed, moved around, and pointers and addresses recalculated to accompany changes and additional instructions-- and data is what ROM hackers are mostly working with, if I understand you right. 

You don't.

This is why you don't see new minigames being made with regularity by ROM hackers, or on any platform for that matter where the none of the game's code is readable, either in script or uncompiled form.  And what changes you do see are little confined changes that can be accomplished by reasonably straightforward methodologies, like say translations.

Actually, it's because a large part of the "scene" is in there to take good (or not-so-good, in some cases) games that never got an english release and make them english, not make new games.

There's really very little homebrew activity on the classic japanese consoles. It's all on 1st-era systems and the modern platforms.

But on the 1st-era side, people have hacked trackball support, speech synthesis routines, and music into 2600 games. That should count for something, particularly given the insane constraints of the 2600.

Even in your experience with console modders, you can see that changes to assembly code and inherent functionality have always been extremely minor.  Poke a bit here, change one instruction to skip over a whole series of instructions there to bypass a CD check. 

Haha.

No.

I've seen them rip entire routines out and replace them with entirely new routines.

I've seen them run through and change the location of entire blocks of data.

I've yet to see a disk check skip, particularly as there's really no way to be booting a console game WITHOUT a disk.

But changes to data files are widespread in comparison and almost the entire domain of modding, at least for those games that don't have SDKs or expose their mechanics through scripting.  There's a reason for that. 

*shrugs*

I still say sifting through raw assembly on a system with poorly-understood hardware is harder than sifting through raw assembly on a well-understood system.

[Sundown]

The optional minigame itself might not be considered as bad, since the action is taking place off camera. The mechanics are the same, in that you're using the analog stick to get in the rhythm, but to goal is actually to knock a vase of the table beside the bed.

Ah. I suppose I can see why GTA might get an AO while God of War wouldn't.

Boobs outside the context of sex--M.

Interactive sex with no visual counterpart--M. (Which is similar to GTA's buying time with a prostitute, although slightly more interactive.)

Interactive sex with actual visuals--AO.

Not saying these standards make sense, but that seems to be what the ESRB is going by.

Most extensive (visible) change I can think of in a translation hack so far consisted of a completely new text display routine, because the original game used vertical text.

Still extremely minor compared to adding new play modes or full minigames. Would we agree on that?

Data files, console or otherwise, aren't nearly as indecipherable as the series of opcodes that make up binary executables.  Seriously.  It's not even the same thing.

Actually, it is.

I think we're going into the territory of "is too!" and "is not!" All I can say is that in my experience and knowledge, having been versed in MIPS assembly (which I believe many of these consoles run on), my (albiet limited) familiarity with compiler technology, and some direct experience hacking data files and looking at hacks that have been done by others, I would assess that making significant and extensive changes to a binary executable such as adding a whole minigame and splicing it into existing code compiled from a natural language is orders of magnitudes more difficult than hacking data files.

If this assessment isn't one you give much credit to, despite the fact that it's related to what I sorta do for a living, then either you've already come to your own conclusion on how difficult inserting gameplay elements from scratch into a game like GTA is (not old console games that are much more simple and written in assembly to start with and thus not prone to what compiler optimizations can do to code), or I guess there's something I just don't know. And the latter is a very possible thing.

Actually, it's because a large part of the "scene" is in there to take good (or not-so-good, in some cases) games that never got an english release and make them english, not make new games.

There's really very little homebrew activity on the classic japanese consoles. It's all on 1st-era systems and the modern platforms.

At any rate I wasn't talking about moderately simple, classic japanese consoles that are programmed in assembly for hardware that's a whole less complex than what we see today. Okay, yes, I concede that hackers can go as far as hacking new text routines into old games that are moderately simple. But the scope of that is orders of magnitude smaller than the sorts of modifications we were originally talking about.

But on the 1st-era side, people have hacked trackball support, speech synthesis routines, and music into 2600 games. That should count for something, particularly given the insane constraints of the 2600.

Actually, the 2600's constraints make it easier to hack, not harder. The whole system is rather simple, there's not nearly as much code to look at, and the original machine language *is* the platform's language and what the games were programed in in the first place. It doesn't even *begin* to compare to the compiled code of a much more complicated game with a much greater codespace from a natural language with a compiler that optimizes and shifts instructions around at will.

Yes, adding speech to Berzerk is impressive. But the impressive part is the programming efficiency and prowess with crummy hardware, not in the actual part of hacking we're discussing the difficulty of-- how to decipher the meaning of the code you're looking at, figuring out where to insert new functionality, and doing it properly so it doesn't break anything.

I've seen them rip entire routines out and replace them with entirely new routines.

I've seen them run through and change the location of entire blocks of data.

I just realized that you were still referring to simple console games that were orginally programmed in assembly, which I'll agree is much easier to work with:

Moving data is a relatively simply matter, so long as all the pointers to it are also updated. Them "ripping out" entire routines and replacing them with entirely "new" ones isn't a feat of greater complexity than adding code. It in fact makes their job easier. And now I think about it, adding new functions wouldn't be that difficult, if the new functions were appended at the end of the code space or somewhere free in the ROM, with jumps to it at the right places.

All simple changes in comparison to inserting minigames in a recent compiled title. A primary difficulty in the latter is figuring out where you are in the code, and what it's actually doing. You don't know for sure that you're dealing with the game's code for sound just because it's writing to such and such a register. With so many levels of abstractions in the code itself due it's scope, and with whatever libraries that might have been compiled in, it's just not as straightforward as navigating an old console game's assembly code.

I've yet to see a disk check skip, particularly as there's really no way to be booting a console game WITHOUT a disk.

Whoops. I was talking about games for the PC, that actually compares to GTA in complexity and in the way it was programmed.

I still say sifting through raw assembly on a system with poorly-understood hardware is harder than sifting through raw assembly on a well-understood system.

And I'd say that sifting through raw assembly in a game that was programmed in assembly, is of limited complexity and length, on hardware that is rigid and unchanging-- a certain address, register, or interrupt always corresponds to a specific piece of hardware-- is much easier than doing the same with:

A game whose codebase is several orders of magnitude larger, is written in a natural language, compiled by a compiler that optimizes and shifts instructions in ways that obfuscate the original logic and flow of the code, with game code lying many layers of abstractions away from the hardware, on a platform whose hardware is much, much more complex, and what hardware even exists and where it's located is might not be a given, such as on the PC ( although the APIs abstract much of that away).

An old console's hardware might be poorly understood, but they're still relatively simple and limited in complexity, and understanding them is more of an excercise of finding documentation, experimentation, and observation. In fact, the raw code sometimes is an aid to figuring how such hardware works.

But I suppose if you simply feel that the difficulty of what your friends do in classic console hacking, as impressive as it all is, is truly representative of the difficulty and possibility level of other forms of hacking-- that because it is close to the epitome of what would constitute difficult hacking, all other types of hacking, no matter how involved and complex and how different in nature, are thus possible and even probable, then there's not much I can offer that would persuade you otherwise. *shrug*

I guess I'm still waiting for someone to hack me new gameplay and content into the binary of a recent game that didn't have it compiled in already. They can have all my candy when they do.

-Al

Edited July 28, 2005 by Sundown

[JB0]

Most extensive (visible) change I can think of in a translation hack so far consisted of a completely new text display routine, because the original game used vertical text.

Still extremely minor compared to adding new play modes or full minigames.  Would we agree on that?

Yes.

Though the complexity is a bit more than it looks, since they're working with a scanline-based renderer.

But the textbox is a seperate background layer overlaid on top of the primary instead of being drawn on the same layer, so it's less than it could be(if they were, say, hacking the NES installment in the series).

Data files, console or otherwise, aren't nearly as indecipherable as the series of opcodes that make up binary executables.  Seriously.  It's not even the same thing.

Actually, it is.

I think we're going into the territory of "is too!" and "is not!"  All I can say is that in my experience and knowledge, having been versed in MIPS assembly (which I believe many of these consoles run on),

PS1 only.

...

Well, maybe the N64 too.

PS2 uses a custom chip that I don't recall being based on anything that was ever stated.

XBox is a Pentium3 derivative.

GameCube's a PowerPC derivative.

Dreamcast was an SH-4, if I recall.

The Ataris and the NES are 6502-based, SNES is 65816(16-bit version of the 6502), the Genesis is 68000-based.

my (albiet limited) familiarity with compiler technology, and some direct experience hacking data files and looking at hacks that have been done by others, I would assess that making significant and extensive changes to a binary executable such as adding a whole minigame and splicing it into existing code compiled from a natural language is orders of magnitudes more difficult than hacking data files.

But my point is(or was) that translators DON'T just hack data files.

If this assessment isn't one you give much credit to, despite the fact that it's related to what I sorta do for a living, then either you've already come to your own conclusion on how difficult inserting gameplay elements from scratch into a game like GTA is (not old console games that are much more simple and written in assembly to start with and thus not prone to what compiler optimizations can do to code), or I guess there's something I just don't know. And the latter is a very possible thing.

I didn't say it wasn't hard. Just not impossible.

And for what it's worth, there's evidence that some of the later 16-bit era console games may HAVE been coded in a high-level language(it's known fact that the XBand modem's code was written in one), though the PS1 was the first console where it was a widespread practice.

Actually, it's because a large part of the "scene" is in there to take good (or not-so-good, in some cases) games that never got an english release and make them english, not make new games.

There's really very little homebrew activity on the classic japanese consoles. It's all on 1st-era systems and the modern platforms.

At any rate I wasn't talking about moderately simple, classic japanese consoles that are programmed in assembly for hardware that's a whole less complex than what we see today.  Okay, yes, I concede that hackers can go as far as hacking new text routines into old games that are moderately simple.  But the scope of that is orders of magnitude smaller than the sorts of modifications we were originally talking about.

*shrugs*

Seemed relevant.

And as far as complexity goes, I'd argue the older hardware is MORE complex from a coding point of view.

It takes a lot more fancy tricks to get a given effect on the older hardware than newer systems. You may see an SNES game shift video modes 3 times over the course of a single frame(actual game in mind: HyperZone) but on a PC it can all be done in the same graphics mode.

Hell, the 2600 didn't even have provisions for telling the software when a VBlank period began. They had to run a timer from the instant the system was turned on to keep the game in sync with the screen AND draw each scanline as it was generated by the TV(no framebuffer).

But on the 1st-era side, people have hacked trackball support, speech synthesis routines, and music into 2600 games. That should count for something, particularly given the insane constraints of the 2600.

Actually, the 2600's constraints make it easier to hack, not harder.  The whole system is rather simple, there's not nearly as much code to look at, and the original machine language *is* the platform's language and what the games were programed in in the first place.  It doesn't even *begin* to compare to the compiled code of a much more complicated game with a much greater codespace from a natural language with a compiler that optimizes and shifts instructions around at will.

You're saying it's easier to work within the confines of 128 bytes of RAM, on a system that can only draw a single scanline at a time, has no provision for informing software when a vblank period starts, has been described by one programmer as requiring you to discard every good programming practice known to man, with software that uses more undocumented hacks than actual system features, in a situation where you have to count exactly how many instructions you're adding because there's only a dozen or 2 free instructions per frame(the reason no one hacked trackball support into 2600 Centipede was that there literally weren't enough spare clock cycles to read one) is easier than code that's messy, but has no other restrictions?

They're DIFFRENT challenges, sure. But not neessarily lesser ones.

Yes, adding speech to Berzerk is impressive. But the impressive part is the programming efficiency and prowess with crummy hardware, not in the actual part of hacking we're discussing the difficulty of-- how to decipher the meaning of the code you're looking at, figuring out where to insert new functionality, and doing it properly so it doesn't break anything.

How is that part not relevant to this?

If it were a programmed from scratch version of Berzerk, I'd see why the hardware restrictions were the relevant part.

I've seen them rip entire routines out and replace them with entirely new routines.

I've seen them run through and change the location of entire blocks of data.

I just realized that you were still referring to simple console games that were orginally programmed in assembly, which I'll agree is much easier to work with:

I'd debate the "simple" part.

I've yet to see a disk check skip, particularly as there's really no way to be booting a console game WITHOUT a disk.

Whoops.  I was talking about games for the PC, that actually compares to GTA in complexity and in the way it was programmed.

Ah-ha.

I still say sifting through raw assembly on a system with poorly-understood hardware is harder than sifting through raw assembly on a well-understood system.

And I'd say that sifting through raw assembly in a game that was programmed in assembly, is of limited complexity and length, on hardware that is rigid and unchanging-- a certain address, register, or interrupt always corresponds to a specific piece of hardware-- is much easier than doing the same with:

A game whose codebase is several orders of magnitude larger, is written in a natural language, compiled by a compiler that optimizes and shifts instructions in ways that obfuscate the original logic and flow of the code, with game code lying many layers of abstractions away from the hardware, on a platform whose hardware is much, much more complex, and what hardware even exists and where it's located is might not be a given, such as on the PC ( although the APIs abstract much of that away)

That would be another way of looking at it.

An old console's hardware might be poorly understood, but they're still relatively simple and limited in complexity, and understanding them is more of an excercise of finding documentation, experimentation, and observation. In fact, the raw code sometimes is an aid to figuring how such hardware works.

More of an aid than usually non-existant documentation, anyways.

But I suppose if you simply feel that the difficulty of what your friends do in classic console hacking, as impressive as it all is, is truly representative of the difficulty and possibility level of other forms of hacking-- that because it is close to the epitome of what would constitute difficult hacking, all other types of hacking, no matter how involved and complex and how different in nature, are thus possible and even probable, then there's not much I can offer that would persuade you otherwise.

It was originally cited merely as an example of adding new code to existing code.

From there I was just saying that it's harder than you make it out to be.

*shrug* I guess I'm still waiting for someone to hack me new gameplay and content into an executable of a title that was made in the last 10 years.

Didn't find an example, but I DID find this:

http://www.refused-classification.com/Games_DN3D.htm

Apparently Duke Nukem 3D had a similar issue in Austrailia as GTA is having now.

Only Australia's (government-operated) ratings board decided the old rating was stil good.

Oooohhhh... they have a whole page of GTA.

As of yet, no action has been taken against San Andreas, but they are considering revoking it's rating.

Edited July 29, 2005 by JB0

[Sundown]

I didn't say it wasn't hard. Just not impossible.

Well, nothing's impossible. Some things are much more difficult than others, so much so that it's not done often if at all, even if they are vaguely similar.

It was originally cited merely as an example of adding new code to existing code.

From there I was just saying that it's harder than you make it out to be.

You're right. It's not as hard as I originally stated if we're just talking about games of a much smaller scope than GTA on hardware that's much more limited, mostly programmed in assembly to start with. I didn't have those examples in mind when I first stated that, and I probably should have been more specific.

You're saying it's easier to work within the confines of 128 bytes of RAM, on a system that can only draw a single scanline at a time, has no provision for informing software when a vblank period starts, has been described by one programmer as requiring you to discard every good programming practice known to man, with software that uses more undocumented hacks than actual system features, in a situation where you have to count exactly how many instructions you're adding because there's only a dozen or 2 free instructions per frame(the reason no one hacked trackball support into 2600 Centipede was that there literally weren't enough spare clock cycles to read one) is easier than code that's messy, but has no other restrictions?

No. But we weren't solely talking about how easy it is to code for a particular platform. We were talking about how easy it is to get into an existing program and make more than confined, surface changes, and thus, how hard it is for such hacks to be made, or at least I was.

I wouldn't say hacking new features into Berzerk on crummy, arcane hardware was an easy feat. But the scope of the hardware you have to understand is actually quite small, and the machine code you're parsing reveals what it's doing more readily than the compiled assembly of a on a much larger system. Thus, I would venture to say that adding voice synthesis in Berzerk is a more likely, and thus easier feat than adding new voice synthesis routines for CJ into GTA. Programming the voice synthesis itself for the PS2 or PC would be infinitely more straightforward. Getting it into GTA would be the difficulty.

And we're also not talking about code that's merely "messy". We're talking about a codebase that as several hundred times larger. Take a 50 MB executable-- average by today's standards. You have 390,625 times more data to parse through than your 128 byte program. Yes, you don't have to parse through ALL of the code, but it's size and complexity just makes it that much more difficult to find what you're looking for.

I'll go one step further and offer that if I were to write Berzerk for Windows using DirectX that merely attempted to clone the 2600 version, adding something like voice synthesis to this compiled binary would be a more difficult feat than doing it on the 2600 version itself.

Our firmware engineers regularly send us digital timing ram-- instructions for our programmable video timing generator-- and they're not too long. I can probably parse through it and figure out what it's doing if I took the time to learn the firmware. But take that code, multiply it by 390,000 times, make chunks of that code refer to other chunks of that code, shuffle it around a bit, and my chances of knowing what the heck I'm looking at and where to find all the things I'm looking for go down drastically. Sometimes it's difficult enough to parse through the source code to figure out how to integrate new functionality, especially if the project's very large. Now try to do the same with code in compiled assembly.

a system that can only draw a single scanline at a time, has no provision for informing software when a vblank period starts

As I understand it, Atari programmers generate the vsyncs and keep track of 37 scanlines either by sending 37 wsyncs or using the Atari's internal timer. The latter lets you do some logic before the blanking period ends. The software doesn't need to be "informed" of anything, as it's driving the TV and rasterization itself. How to do all this is all pretty well documented, and I'd found that it was described pretty decently in a couple pages of text.

Anyway, I'm not at all saying the sorts of hacks you note are easy. The older hardware was definitely harder to program for, but much easier to hack into. Modern hardware is generally easier to code for by far, especially with the natural languages that are available, but hacking the binaries is difficult beyond modest changes to variables, conditionals, and jumps.

You know, I'll go ahead and concede that it's doable to append routines that get run at a specific point of a program that's easy to find. But adding functionality that shares data properly with the existing program, is tied to the game mechanics, and is actually triggered when something specific happens in the game begins to make the task of knowing what to do with the existing code many times harder. I keep referring to hacks of that nature because that's the sort of hack we were discussing in the first place.

The challenges are different. Neither are "easy". But that doesn't mean one can't be much harder than the other. I would agree that if you knew exactly what changes to make to the existing code, integrating new functionality and instructions in a modern program would be a breeze. But doing that is sometimes like hunting for a particular piece of hay in a barn of haystacks.

Apparently Duke Nukem 3D had a similar issue in Austrailia as GTA is having now.

Only Australia's (government-operated) ratings board decided the old rating was stil good.

Oooohhhh... they have a whole page of GTA.

As of yet, no action has been taken against San Andreas, but they are considering revoking it's rating.

315354[/snapback]

Interesting. Guess Australia has a different philosophy from the ESRB. Too bad they hate guns.

-Al

[JB0]

I'm gonna skip most of the post as I was being a dumbass last night.

a system that can only draw a single scanline at a time, has no provision for informing software when a vblank period starts

As I understand it, Atari programmers generate the vsyncs and keep track of 37 scanlines either by sending 37 wsyncs or using the Atari's internal timer. The latter lets you do some logic before the blanking period ends. The software doesn't need to be "informed" of anything, as it's driving the TV and rasterization itself. How to do all this is all pretty well documented, and I'd found that it was described pretty decently in a couple pages of text.

Yes. I gather the timer was the preferred mechanism, for what it's worth.

It's just an added piece of complexity.

Though like many things on the VCS, it can be used to make effects that the hardware "can't" do.

Apparently Duke Nukem 3D had a similar issue in Austrailia as GTA is having now.

Only Australia's (government-operated) ratings board decided the old rating was stil good.

Oooohhhh... they have a whole page of GTA.

As of yet, no action has been taken against San Andreas, but they are considering revoking it's rating.

315354[/snapback]

Interesting. Guess Australia has a different philosophy from the ESRB. Too bad they hate guns.

Heh.

It's possible they WILL revoke the game's rating.

Just gotta wait for the beaurocracy to get moving and see what happens.

One thing I DID notice rummaging through that site is the australian ratings board has on several occasions complained that the 18+ rating of their other media ratings devisions isn't available to their software division, essentially forcing them to outlaw any software that is deemed inappropriate for persons over 15. Seems tehir legislature needs to update the law.

[Skull Leader]

One thing I DID notice rummaging through that site is the australian ratings board has on several occasions complained that the 18+ rating of their other media ratings devisions isn't available to their software division, essentially forcing them to outlaw any software that is deemed inappropriate for persons over 15. Seems tehir legislature needs to update the law.

315611[/snapback]

Maybe they're doing it that way on purpose? Trying to set a standard? It would be a pretty low tactic, could it be possible?

[JB0]

One thing I DID notice rummaging through that site is the australian ratings board has on several occasions complained that the 18+ rating of their other media ratings devisions isn't available to their software division, essentially forcing them to outlaw any software that is deemed inappropriate for persons over 15. Seems tehir legislature needs to update the law.

315611[/snapback]

Maybe they're doing it that way on purpose? Trying to set a standard? It would be a pretty low tactic, could it be possible?

315622[/snapback]

Quite likely, actually.

A lot of people in the position to make the laws haven't quite gotten over the "games are for kids" attitude.

Of course, the fact that the ratrings board is complaining about it indicates that at least some of them rcognize the fact.

[Jinnai]

One thing I DID notice rummaging through that site is the australian ratings board has on several occasions complained that the 18+ rating of their other media ratings devisions isn't available to their software division, essentially forcing them to outlaw any software that is deemed inappropriate for persons over 15. Seems tehir legislature needs to update the law.

315611[/snapback]

Maybe they're doing it that way on purpose? Trying to set a standard? It would be a pretty low tactic, could it be possible?

315622[/snapback]

Quite likely, actually.

A lot of people in the position to make the laws haven't quite gotten over the "games are for kids" attitude.

Of course, the fact that the ratrings board is complaining about it indicates that at least some of them rcognize the fact.

315630[/snapback]

For the record, the original Phantasmagoria by Sierra was banned outright from ever entering here (Australia) due to content.

Duke Nukem 3D was withheld until the "adult" content was put behind a block that adults could access by paying money and getting a "code".

GTA 3 was on sale here for 6 months until it's classification was revoked, and it was banned from sale until the game removed the visuals for whenever you recieved health from prositutues. Once that was done, it was re-released with MA-15+ however the content was still in the game.. you just had to unlock it with a code.

Similar to what's going on now.

GTA:SA has had it's rating revoked down here, and it's been pulled from shelves.

But the video game industry down here has been pushing for an R (18+) rating for YEARS. The government won't give it to them.

However, even with R ratings, some things don't make it past our sensors.. the film Ken Park is banned from screening and distribution down here.

[MGREXX]

oh wait.................Is Rockstar getting bullied......again???????

Gamespot brews some more Hot Coffee related news!!!!!!!!!!

The fun just never stops at Rockstar.......and they have been deserving this for a LONG time now. Ain't life a biotch.

[JB0]

One thing I DID notice rummaging through that site is the australian ratings board has on several occasions complained that the 18+ rating of their other media ratings devisions isn't available to their software division, essentially forcing them to outlaw any software that is deemed inappropriate for persons over 15. Seems tehir legislature needs to update the law.

315611[/snapback]

Maybe they're doing it that way on purpose? Trying to set a standard? It would be a pretty low tactic, could it be possible?

315622[/snapback]

Quite likely, actually.

A lot of people in the position to make the laws haven't quite gotten over the "games are for kids" attitude.

Of course, the fact that the ratrings board is complaining about it indicates that at least some of them rcognize the fact.

315630[/snapback]

For the record, the original Phantasmagoria by Sierra was banned outright from ever entering here (Australia) due to content.

Duke Nukem 3D was withheld until the "adult" content was put behind a block that adults could access by paying money and getting a "code".

GTA 3 was on sale here for 6 months until it's classification was revoked, and it was banned from sale until the game removed the visuals for whenever you recieved health from prositutues. Once that was done, it was re-released with MA-15+ however the content was still in the game.. you just had to unlock it with a code.

What I'm reading says Duke Nukem was originally submitted with "adult mode" totally disabled, and there were hacks made to re-enable it.

The publisher later submitted and got an unaltered version rated.

And GTA3 was actually put out on shelves before it was rated.

Take2 ASSUMED that it would get the same rating as GTA and GTA2, so when it was banned, they were left in deep poo.

Similar to what's going on now.

GTA:SA has had it's rating revoked down here, and it's been pulled from shelves.

So that's the latest update on that, I suppose

[Kin]

Ehm... was streetfighter 2 rated? I remember when Honda squeezes Chun Li....

[JB0]

Ehm... was streetfighter 2 rated? I remember when Honda squeezes Chun Li....

316555[/snapback]

HAHA!

[Gunbuster]

Why do Rockstar have been deserving this?

oh wait.................Is Rockstar getting bullied......again???????

Gamespot brews some more Hot Coffee related news!!!!!!!!!!

The fun just never stops at Rockstar.......and they have been deserving this for a LONG time now.  Ain't life a biotch.      

316393[/snapback]

[CoryHolmes]

Why do Rockstar have been deserving this?   

oh wait.................Is Rockstar getting bullied......again???????

Gamespot brews some more Hot Coffee related news!!!!!!!!!!

The fun just never stops at Rockstar.......and they have been deserving this for a LONG time now.  Ain't life a biotch.      

316393[/snapback]

316736[/snapback]

Because they stopped trying to be really innovative and have relied on using shock and controversy to sell their products instead. I feel that Max Payne was their last really innovative game that did well enough at approaching the line but not quite crossing it. I really started losing respect for them with Manhunter and so far they've done nothing to win it back. Bully isn't winning them any points, either.

I think that people are having problems with GTA and not God of War because GoW is a fantasy game, in a fantasy setting. GTA is set in the modern world and is making light of some really bad things, like violence against women and attacking police officers; two things that really, really aren't good.

[Druna Skass]

I think that people are having problems with GTA and not God of War because GoW is a fantasy game, in a fantasy setting.  GTA is set in the modern world and is making light of some really bad things, like violence against women and attacking police officers; two things that really, really aren't good.

316823[/snapback]

I think it's more the whole retarded-@ss mentality that video games are just for kids, and the fact GTA has been around longer. Since GTA has been around longer, more people are just familiar with it than God of War. If God of War came out back in 01 or 02 and GTA came out recently, I'm pretty sure the stupid people would be b!tching up their little temper tantrums over that then GTA.

Look at Columbine, the morons were saying Doom teaches kids how to fire a gun. Yes it was the game those two liked to play, but there are far more realistic FPS out there. I don't recall anyone b!tching up a storm over the then new GoldenEye or MoH.

[Zentrandude]

yah abc still uses footage of the original doom gameplay when they have another article of violent video games.

[MGREXX]

Just when you thought that the Hot Coffee had stopped brewing:

Gamespot article......

[MGREXX]

Looks like the Hot Coffee mod has been decaffeinated:

Gamespot article

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I think all this is being blown way out of proportion but that they left that stuff in the game for controversy to boost sales and awareness for thier game.

Like a famous celebrity, they as a company dont care who they offend unless the media works for them by publicising it, and through attention, they increase sales/generate buzz. (you see in order to stay on the spotlight and for your career you need to perform a stunt like stolen sex videotape, or a wardrobe malfunction. This would be the game equivalent of that )

But this time it backfires on them and greedy lawyers looking for new profits to make from the next big scapegoat of societies' problems (videogames; like comics, music, rock music etc before them) have finally gotten the upper hand and managed to make parents even more paranoid than they should be. Enough to actually damage profits, rather than work to up them. Now the whole: "it was the hacker's fault, not ours" excuse is bullshit damage control to limit how much they are liable for if someone sues them. It's got nothing to do with them being ACTUALLY innocent, since the shock value of sex is what sells and they know it. You'd have to be silly to not see this. (the adult gamer market will be lucrative in future, more than games aimed kids I think. But it will take time for the industry to mature such that people in power who have grown up playing games can change attitude in future)

I like thier games (especially the earlier DMA Design stuff on the amiga) but it was only a matter of time before the media would blow this out of proportion and finally punish the most successful big companies (all giants are in danger) for games that are recogised the most by the mainstream. But that sense of "protecting children from danger" comes more from thier intent to cash in than any actual genuine concern for children. (the media needs to make money too - money makes the world go round and is the root of all evil ) Nothing new here.

But it will be sad to see innocent scapegoats in future (lets just say all future videogame companies that are targeted because little timmy saw something in the game and was damaged and now his parents want compensation) who will have to defend themselves whenever a parent wants money because they are lousy parents and won't pay attention to what thier kids do, and just be more involved in thier lives. (ie school shootings blamed on doom, not drugs, or negligent parenting)

I think what you see is a symptom of people not actually genuinely wanting to fix the real problems of society and instead it is just them merely profiting from them (lawyers who gain) or for political purpose. (great speeches with massive generalisation of industry and alarmist fear mongering, resulting in bans, re-ratings and knee jerk responses - giving the impression of caring - resulting in more votes and sympathy from the older crowd)

As a person who is against censorship, I wish that here in australia we had an R rating so that games that are violent, gory, but mostly aimed for adults (this includes sex no more explicit than you see in movies) could make it here intact as they were originally intended. I don't care (or pretend to care with the "think of the children" crowd) who is offended since they can just refuse to buy it, or pay attention just like with anything, rather than tell the government to tell me what I can and can not see, which only makes everyone else suffer in the end. (the ratings are no less informative than any other ratings system imo.)

But they won't do it until seeking compensation keeps rewarding the lazy and unthinking people, who just refuse to govern themselves (eg turning something off or just not buying something) with common sense, rather than making it profitable for the greedy who have thier own agendas and who are just using the fear mongering as a vehicle to profit.

Overall I think the creators should be responsible and should never have lied (Hackers DID NOT ADD the content, merely enabled something that already existed) but at the same time, I hate how much something as small as this could have gotten so big. It is no big deal even for kids younger than the allowed age of the ratings. To me the ratings are only a guide, not a garuantee of protection of your child's innocence from exposure to happenings in the real world that are no less disturbing than what you might see broadcast on tv or in the news, or read from in a book. Good parenting and how you raise the kid to think maturely plays a far more important role than any other environmental factor like exposure to games with violence.

Games do not act as the parenting tool, and it is when good parents who raised thier children properly know that they've done a good job, that they can relax and allow thier kids to be exposed to violence and sex in entertainment, knowing they can deal with exposure in a mature way and be prepared - seeing reality and fantasy and making distinctions that don't affect thier normal behaviour such that they would go so far to copy what they see. Which is the biggest misconception ever because the only people who do that, only say they were influenced by something else as a way to rally sympathy after they've been caught in a crime and to lay blame on others, rather than taking responsbility for thier own actions. The criminal then gets off easy knowing people are too stupid and gullible and will swallow anything, believing the cause of thier behaviour is rooted in the game world. (any excuse will do - why not blame the giants who have lotsa money?)

This is why you will still see images of unrealistic pixelated doom footage in any anti-games news coverage - it is due mainly to ignorance and misunderstanding than anything, based on this concept that a game can MAKE someone to do something against thier will and the person has no control over thier own action. Or the false belief that a movie like the matrix can CAUSE an innocent person to become cold blooded killer in real life when in fact they were messed up to begin with. But they will not try to go any deeper than the surface, because people actualy profit from the ignorance.

Edited August 11, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[azrael]

Not to beat around the dead horse but...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4118270.stm

Makes you wonder.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I agree with what this kid in the comments section says:

As a 15-year old who regularly plays 18-rated games such as Grand Theft Auto and Doom 3 I fail to see what the large problem is. 18-rated games are not singularly responsible for violence among children, so stop using them as a scapegoat! My parents are aware of the age rating on these games, but they also know that most of the content of these games is detached from real life. It is up to the parents to decide whether their child is mature enough to play these games. The game manufacturers cannot be blamed, because they fully comply with all regulations. The parents are to blame if they misjudge their child's maturity, because under-age children can not buy games with an age-rating they do not meet. When I was 14, I was prevented from buying a skateboarding game that carries a 15+ rating! The current system works, it allows parents to be directly involved in choosing what their child plays.

Aleks Lukic, Leeds, UK

Children mature at different rates. It's when the parent neglects raising them up properly that it leads to problems but that has nothing to do with game encouraging them to be violent. As a kid I was allowed to see a lot of R-Rated material and I'm not a violent psychopath. (doubles checks just in case - well maybe in the game I am ) The violence that exists in the real world is probably more damaging than what you see in a fictional setting in a game. Maybe some parents just don't want to shelter thier kids too much? As I mentioned before ratings should only be used as a guide. Not wholly relied upon to garuantee some group won't see something they think is offensive. (look at ratings from the past that today would get a milder rating - people opinions vary on what is offensive or inapropriate to them) Don't exchange good parenting for a sticker on a box.

People are reacting to something because its new to them and come up with solutions that won't solve the deeper problems. They just need a scapegoat and to finger point, all the while ignoring the real problem. As games become too mainstream and attract a lot of media attention you will see them blamed like movies, music, comics, etc as bad influences to child behaviour because there is lots of money involved. It's only when there is lots of money involved (and to be gained) that people start worrying about problems. But the solutions to problems should be handled on an individual basis. If there is no evidence that your child is showing violent behaviour in the real world, and they have spent years playing violent games, who is more knowledgeable about thier child: the people coming up with the ratings, or you?

Self responsibility and common sense on an individual level, will go a long way to protecting people from doing stupid things, and in doing those stupid things, prevent harming others. But the problem is this myth that because somebody sees something onscreen (ie a man with a gun shooting targets) he will go out in the real world encouraged to go out and kill real people. In rare cases where this might happen it had nothing to do with the game to begin with, but the person who chose to commit a criminal act on thier own power. (ever heard of copycat killers? they were messed in the head from the beginning and deserved to be locked up, not rewarded or sympathised with because a greedy nutbar lawyer interested in profiting from tradgedies wanted to point the finger at the profitable game giants for his own gain rather than genuinely giving a poo)

There is no evidence to show games has anything to do with influence behaviour in the real world. A kid can play GTA all day and not ever wish to do the things he does in the fictional game environment, in the real world. A lot of people have already started to believe the myth that games can influence your behaviour in the real world, through sheer repetition by the media. Ie the rule of thumb is to get people to agree with you, you just have to keep repeating something over and over again until they eventually accept this as true. And this usually works. Because people will eventually cave in and start to react and say the game companies are kinda responsible rather than people on an individual basis.

As the media focuses its attention and more and more of its coverage and hype on the issue of violent games, it suddenly becomes a problem for the whole nation to be solved, with sweeping changes introduced that no one likes and won't solve problems, but that a small minority secretly wishes to push forward with. Nope dont let your guard down: the existing system should stay as it is and the individuals (the messed up people) should be judged on a case by case basis.

But the key to remember is that there are always people who profit from ignorance (take the nutbar lawyers with an agenda for instance) and hope that people will not think for themselves so that they can push for more stupid changes. This is why the sheer repetition and hype. As people start to believe the hype they can gradually convert you over time.

Although I agree 18-only games should be restricted to adults, (retailers should check for id) eventually an adult gamer who has kids of his own will want to play the game, and like what happens with movies or video rentals, that content will somehow make its way into the home for the kid to be exposed to. (parents will just buy the game for the kid or feel thier own kid can handle it) So I don't believe that game companies should take the wrap for anything that the people involved in stupidity (using companies as a scapegoat cuz thier lawyer told them to) choose to do. What you read about are only a very small number of cases which are highlighted and selected by the media to blow out of proprtion, (because they have an agenda of thier own) not representative of the majority who are fine with things as they are.

The stupid people should just learn to control themselves or be jailed as a way to teach them a lesson to take responsbility. Trial by fire.

Edited August 13, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker