Quote: "Once again, the ESRB has failed our parents," Yee enraged. "This particular game has been known to include extremely heinous acts of violence, and now it has been uncovered that the game also includes explicit sexual scenes that are inappropriate for our children."
Quote: "I have urged the ESRB on numerous occasions to rate this game AO based on its blatantly graphic nature," he continued. "Clearly the ESRB has a conflict of interest in rating these games... Parents cannot trust the ESRB to rate games appropriately or the industry to look out for our children's best interests."
Quote:The mod's author, Patrick Wildenborg had told the press that his code adds no new content to the game, but unlocks what is already on the disc.
"If Rockstar Games denies that, then they're lying and I will be able to prove that," Wildenborg wrote. "My mod does not introduce anything to the game. All the content that is shown was already present on the DVD."
Quote: "The disturbing material in 'Grand Theft Auto' and other games like it is stealing the innocence of our children, and it's making the difficult job of being a parent even harder," Clinton said.
Full article here
You have to download a special, home-brewed mod to unlock it.
Some words of advice: DON'T SELL GTA TO LITTLE KIDS.
It's really as easy as that.
I'd heard about that so-called "sex minigame", though the screenshots I'd seen looked blatantly photoshopped. Shall I assume it's true, then?
Even if it is, gimme a break, anyone who should be buying this game should be of the age to be exposed to this kind of thing, that's why it's rated MA! Once again, the ESRB rating system proves that it is as worthless as the terror alert color code.
AO? I can't think of anything that's been branded that rare rating. Even BMX XXX with it's large amount of nudity only garnered a rating of MA.
Give me a break. GTA: SA is corrupting our children? It was not MADE for children! That demographic was never meant to play it, and if they are, the sole blame lies with the parents. Simple as that.
Of course it's always the fault of the developers for making the games and never the parents for letting their children buy and play the games.
Parents never want to hear that they've done something wrong regarding their children. Only problem is that many do make bad or even stupid decisions, then simply try to pass the blame away from them and onto something, anything, else.
Sadly, the controversy regarding games makes the videogame industry a perfect target.
And it'll stay that way until an easier target comes along.
Quote:You have to download a special, home-brewed mod to unlock it.
Actually, there is a way to play it on PS2 also... requires an Action Replay, though.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/07/15/...29301.html
Quote:Confirmed: Sex minigame in PS2 San Andreas
Cheat unlocks preexisting code in controversy-rocked Grand Theft Auto game, undermining Rockstar Games' claims of hacker mischief.
This week saw a Grand Theft Auto game once again at the center of a nationwide controversy. The point of contention this time was the so-called "Hot Coffee" mod for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, which had everyone from anti-game crusader Jack Thompson to US Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) percolating with outrage and/or calls for federal game regulation.
The Hot Coffee mod first surfaced last month, when the PC version of San Andreas was released. The mod, which is available on numerous Web sites, adds a bonus sex minigame as a reward for the numerous "girlfriend" missions in San Andreas.
Previously, when game hero Carl "CJ" Johnson successfully wined and dined one of several girlfriends a certain number of times, she would ask him into her house for "coffee." After entering, the game shows an external shot of the house with muffled sounds of a couple emitting moans in flagrante delicto. PC versions of San Andreas with the "Hot Coffee" mod installed show what goes on inside the house, treating players to a sexually graphic minigame of CJ fornicating with his girlfriend.
According to its creators, the Hot Coffee mod merely unlocks hidden, preexisting code inside San Andreas. The game's publisher, Rockstar Games, appeared to vehemently--but carefully--deny that charge in a statement earlier this week. "So far we have learned that the 'Hot Coffee' modification is the work of a determined group of hackers who have gone to significant trouble to alter scenes in the official version of the game," the company said. "In violation of the software user agreement, hackers created the 'Hot Coffee' modification by disassembling and then combining, recompiling and altering the game's source code."
Rockstar's statement also claimed that the mod was the product of complex technical tampering. "Since the 'Hot Coffee' scenes cannot be created without intentional and significant technical modifications and reverse-engineering of the game's source code, we are currently investigating ways that we can increase the security protection of the source code and prevent the game from being altered by the 'Hot Coffee' modification," read the statement.
However, Rockstar Games' argument has been undermined by an increasing number of reports that claimed the sex minigame is in the PlayStation 2 version of San Andreas. Since the PS2 version comes on an unmoddable DVD, it cannot have any content added to it, although cheat codes--created either by the publisher or third parties--can unlock preexisting code on the disc. While devices such as GameShark and Action Replay Max can tweak preexisting variables in system memory with cheats, they cannot inject new models, animations, and/or code into a game.
To prove or disprove rumors that the PS2 San Andreas contains a sexually graphic minigame, GameSpot decided to test the cheat codes circulating around the Web on a sealed, first-edition copy of San Andreas. After acquiring the "Uncensored Hot Coffee" codes from the respected tech-blog Kotaku, we entered them into an easily obtainable Action Replay Max cheat device. After entering the "Enable all Girlfriends" cheat, we began the game and then gave CJ maximum sex appeal, via a cheat from GameFAQs that requires no external code.
After saving, our test editor had Carl visit the house of his nearest girlfriend, Denise in Los Santos. Carl then took Denise on a series of dates to the nearest bar. After a few complications--including being busted for two-timing by another of CJ's girlfriends--we completed a fourth date with Denise, after which she invited us into her house for "coffee."
The next screen proved that the PlayStation 2 edition of the game does indeed include a sexually graphic minigame, which plays almost exactly the same as the Hot Coffee mod. It begins inside a bedroom with Denise, wearing only a pink thong and a cutoff T-shirt bearing the Rockstar logo, performing simulated fellatio on CJ, who is fully clothed in jeans and a "wife beater"-style tank top.
After a few seconds, the minigame proceeds to semi-explicit simulated copulation. Although players can change the camera angle with the circle button, as well as cycle though three sexual positions with the square button, no genitalia are ever seen. To win, players must maintain a steady rhythm with the left analog stick to build up an "excitement meter" on the right of the screen. Fill the meter and Denise becomes very excited, telling CJ he is "the man" before the game congratulates you with the words "Nice guys finish last!" Let the meter drop to empty and the game admonishes you with "Failure to satisfy a woman is a CRIME!"
Given that the minigame is about as raunchy as an episode of Sex and the City, cannot be accessed without entering a long string of cheat codes, and takes several hours of effort to access, charges that San Andreas is "pornographic" may seem extreme to some. However, its existence does appear to contradict Rockstar Games' carefully worded statement blaming hacker mischief for the existence of the Hot Coffee mod.
As for what I think... I don't know. I don't think this would get the game an AO rating, even if it were easily available... it could, because it's sex, but on the other hand, there is no nudity and the characters are clothed at all times... it'd probably be on the edge... as it is, hidden like this, it'd be kind of absurd to give it an AO rating.
And anyway, how is this so much worse than everything else in this game? Really, the attacks on GTA aren't for this, they're for everything but because they can't get it banned for violence they go after it for this...
It does bring up the question of how games should be regulated, though. I do think self regulation works, for sure. But if it becomes necessary at some point to use an ID to get an M-rated game, while it'd be too bad, I could see why it might happen...
Quote:AO? I can't think of anything that's been branded that rare rating. Even BMX XXX with it's large amount of nudity only garnered a rating of MA.
This is something that anti-videogame people complain about, you know...
Whether the code for certain things exists on the disk or not, if the game by itself doesn't allow one in any way to get access to it, then it is effectively NOT in the game at all, and such a mod effectively IS adding it.
Quote:Whether the code for certain things exists on the disk or not, if the game by itself doesn't allow one in any way to get access to it, then it is effectively NOT in the game at all, and such a mod effectively IS adding it.
No, they're unlocking a hidden, inaccessible feature. There is a difference.
So is the Gameshark code that allows you to play some weird test stage in Goldeneye, but that doesn't mean they ever wanted anyone to access it. Though in this case maybe that's exactly what Rockstar wanted. They avoid hassle from the ESRB by saying people hacked the game, but still give dedicated fans what they want. I guess only Rockstar knows for sure.
Quote:there is no nudity and the characters are clothed at all times...
There is in the Hot Coffee mod, perhaps the modders decided to spice things up a bit. Hard to say for sure.
Quote:There is in the Hot Coffee mod, perhaps the modders decided to spice things up a bit. Hard to say for sure.
Hmm... I'd heard that it wasn't explicit, and this corroborates that... and the modders said that they didn't change the game code, they just unlocked it, so if they're telling the truth (which this seems to suggest) I doubt they changed anything (for the PC version).
Great Rumbler Wrote:And it'll stay that way until an easier target comes along.
Blame Canada!
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/635/635190p1.html
GTA had its rating revoked... Take Two is giving retailers the options of waiting for new copies that have the content removed or adding AO stickers to the current copies out there.
Oh, and I will say that this makes the rating system seem ... a bit off. I mean, this gets an AO but 'The Sims 2', 'Singles', or 'BMX XXX' don't?
This also raises bad questions about mods, as they say in the post... allowability of modding, etc. I hope it goes nowhere (on the 'it's not our content so we can't be responsible for it' front), but in this climate you never know...
One thing to keep in mind is it actually IS their content, right on the disk.
However, it can't be accessed by any means without a mod. No secret codes or anything, so you have to modify the game.
It's easy to conclude from this that the mod DID add the content then.
From what I can tell, this was not malicious placing of hidden content for modders to find to get by a rating. I suspect it's a lot more likely this is just the common "leftover code" for features they chose from the start not to include. I believe the code was simply something that would have been too messy to take out altogether, so they just made it impossible to access it, which effectively does remove it from the game. They may have even decided to scrap it because they knew how big a controversy it would be (or maybe just because the minigame wasn't even that fun, but that's never stopped Rockstar before so...).
Anyway, this is not something new. The only real new thing here is that someone who has it out for gaming anyway managed to find a site revealing this stuff this time.
Remember Goldeneye and Perfect Dark? "HAX+ORS" have found a LOT of hidden content scrapped from the final game, but could only get to the data left in it by using Gamesharks and such. Basically, modding. Perfect Dark originally planned on including a "perfect head" feature using the Gameboy Camera and the Transfer Pack that would allow a player to take a fuzzy black and white snapshot of their own head, crop it out, color it, and apply it to one of the head models in the game. It was scrapped. They had stated it was due to complications, but modders discovered the code was nearly done as it was. Pretty much everything was in there, they just took out the feature (but left the code in to prevent any unforseen glitches). A lot of people suspect it was due to school shootings that they removed it, lest the news find out there is a game that lets you shoot at your family and friends.... pictures (don't dart boards have the same capacity?). Even older games have hidden content of this sort as well. This really isn't anything new.
Plus, I've SEEN this hidden content. (The news has a habbit of being shocked at lewd content and then SHOWING it to everyone over and over again.) It's poorly rendered models that resemble nude women in the sense that the brain has the amazing capacity to recognize forms even when they aren't there. It's as largely inoffensive as a naked cartoon character (though Ren and Stimpy did get pretty disturbing at times...).
Here's the thing. There are hidden moves I can only access with a Game Shark in Final Fantasy 8. Modding is needed to get to it, so it's effectivelly added content. I say "added" because in no way do I consider those things to be features of the game, a part of the experience, in any normal situation.
The potential for a stone to be a sharpened blade is always there. The blade can easily be seen as already IN the stone, it's just that there's a lot more stone in the way and attached all over that needs to be removed. However, in no way would I arrest someone in post-feudal Japan who happens to be carrying a large stone around just because it is, in a sense, conceiling a sword.
There are obvious differences here, but the point is that when the game is played using the right liscensed equipment, nothing the player can ever do will unlock this hidden content. It takes going to unauthorized measures to effectively "add" it in. I just can't find a way to put the blame on the game makers for not actively trying to prevent it from even being modded to allow such content to exist. Surely in this case the mod was made a LOT easier because the makers weren't completely thorough in removing the scrapped content, but the ease to me is a moot point. To a much greater extent, a game's graphics engine being able to be taken out of the original game and put to work on a new "nudes on ice" game can in no way be blamed on the original makers of the engine.
So at any rate, yes the designers COULD have been more thorough in their deletion of scrapped data, but it's a standard industry procedure to merely remove all CALLS to something without actually removing it because it prevents needing to make sure nothing really did make some calls to it and thus, while on the user end it no longer exists, it may still be needed internally for something. It just takes out a lot of testing, which saves time and money. Anyone who's seen documentaries on the making of today's games, or better yet anyone who's been on a project like that themselves, can vouch that cutting corners is really needed, and if something will be invisible to the user anyway, then it effectively doesn't matter HOW they do it. That's why I say REbirth really is a great looking game and still one of the best looking. Sure they did it with FMV, but since the end result is going to look the same as any game where the camera won't be moving around, only better, why wouldn't they do that if the results would be better? The only reason not to would be, if as they did later, they wanted the camera to be dynamically moving around the scene.
So, don't blame the designers for the content they really did effectively remove. Go back to just blaming them for the stuff that's still in the game.
Now onto another matter. Apparently the solution is, what, giving it an A rating? Adults Only? Um... ABF makes a great point. This is NOT a first in gaming. What about Leisure Suit Larry's... entire series? Penny Arcade made an interesting point on this too. They say that, after reading the descriptions of M and A, the only discernable difference is the length of time the adult content is experienced. To what degree they ask? As they pointed out, many M games involve contant violence for hours on end. How many more hours constitutes an A rating exactly? Leisure Suit Larry involves constant minigames with the end goal being "having sex with the hot foxies, we wear tight pants to show our bulges!", and this can last for hours on end as well.
From what I can tell, changing M to A is NOT going to solve jack. It's just a stunt really to make it look like the ESRB is actually doing something. Well, they are, they are doing what they always do. They slap on a rating with no sense of objective thought. A game that got an E rating on the SNES suddenly has a T rating on the PS (that game being Chrono Trigger). Because they rated FF7 with a T rating, now ALL FF games apparently have a T rating slapped on them despite content (FF1 does NOT have anything a game like Mario doesn't have, which is to say monsters instantly fading away when beaten). OOT managed an E rating, so now no matter what the content all Zelda games are getting an E rating. I suspect the new one will as well. Kingdom Hearts has Disney. Hey no need to play it and see that, according to their own odd standards, it has content on the same level as a Final Fantasy game and would otherwise earn a T (which it really shouldn't, but where's the consistancy?). Here's another. Apparently GE earned a T while Perfect Dark gets an M. The violence level is the same, that is, blood stains on their clothes for the most part. The only difference, the one that apparently "did it" was that the bodies in Perfect Dark took a lot longer to fade away than the ones in GE. Both lasted long enough to tell even the dullest kid "they are dead, not blown clear". Seems a little arbitrary...
So, once again I have to say it would do well if the ESRB first started adopting a policy of deciding some standards for consistancy (perhaps a very thick tome dictating exactly WHAT methods of pleasuring a goat earn a stricter rating). I submit the least arbitrary rating system is still a simple 3 rating one. Anything more can be summed up with notes under the letter. G for "everyone", PG for "think about this" and R for "no seriously, this is NOT for little Billy, letting him in anyway? Okay... whatever...". If they switch to that, with NO stylizing at all mind you, it should be dull as hell to indicate it's serious and not some advertisement to show how cool the game is (that slanted letter design they have now, slanting like it's so cool, it SICKENS me, but at least they took out the staticky background). At least this way the rating system would make some frickin' sense.
But that's only a very small part of this. Once again, the people who actually are BUYING the games (and if they aren't, why exactly do these kids have all this money, and why are you letting them go to the STORE by THEMSELVES at that age?) just don't like to think about having to do any MORE work in raising their kids. Now I get it, raising kids really is very hard and there's a lot of work involved. Parents, as a general rule, aren't lazy good for nothings and do actually take care of their kids, feeding them and everything. But, if they are going to allow them to enjoy today's entertainment at all, they have to take a gestappo approach to it. It's not that today's entertainment is so bad or anything, but if they feel their kids shouldn't be exposed to certain things, they need to take actions themselves to prevent it. Be harsh sometimes in this, as it will be needed. Don't let your kid pick whatever movie or game or music they want without checking it out yourself. Now, a lot of parents don't "play games" and don't want to have to actually sit down and play some video game themselves, feeling like a fool, to make sure it's okay for their kids. But, use some common sense. Don't judge a book entirely on the cover, but the cover IS a bit of a rough guide to what you might find on the inside. IF the cover shows a man inside a futuristic soldier suit holding a gun and aliens are flying around shooting at each other, think to yourself, "might this be a violent game?". Ask around. Generally the people working where they sell games tend to know a little something about games themselves. If you still aren't sure, don't let your kid get it.
That's really all it boils down to. Do your homework. You check to make sure the medicine you take is legimimate and what side effects it has, correct? (I hope so, I hope you don't just take whatever pills your friends gave you from an "all natural" doctor, sheesh, they are PILLS, in what way is THAT collection of chemicals more natural than the ones you get from LEGITIMATE medicine?) Do the same here. It's really not hard to get a rough guide to what to expect in a game with only 5-10 minutes of looking around online. That's not that much time. I mean, as a kid I was lucky to get a new game every few months. If you are getting so many games for your kids so often that a 10 minute search online for each one gets in the way, you really have to reconsider exactly how much stuff you should be getting your kid. Your kid shouldn't feel like they are OWED free stuff. I submit you should hold out JUST enough that they feel LUCKY to get gifts. For me, it was just on the holidays.
Wait...are you telling me that they're upping the rating for San Andreas to an AO because of content that <i>isn't even available without special hardware/software??</i> I could MAYBE understand if it were a normal part of CJ's girlfriend minigames but this is something that was TAKEN OUT OF THE GAME. They're upgrading the rating because of something that, practically, isn't there!
Ugh, I get so sick of crap like this...
Quote:Plus, I've SEEN this hidden content. (The news has a habbit of being shocked at lewd content and then SHOWING it to everyone over and over again.) It's poorly rendered models that resemble nude women in the sense that the brain has the amazing capacity to recognize forms even when they aren't there. It's as largely inoffensive as a naked cartoon character (though Ren and Stimpy did get pretty disturbing at times...).
Yeah, based on those screenshots ... well, let's just say that thanks to GTA:SA's not exactly fantastic graphics engine it's not like you're seeing much. I guess it's the principle of the thing, but if that's so, then what about The Sims... or...
Quote:Now onto another matter. Apparently the solution is, what, giving it an A rating? Adults Only? Um... ABF makes a great point. This is NOT a first in gaming. What about Leisure Suit Larry's... entire series? Penny Arcade made an interesting point on this too. They say that, after reading the descriptions of M and A, the only discernable difference is the length of time the adult content is experienced. To what degree they ask? As they pointed out, many M games involve contant violence for hours on end. How many more hours constitutes an A rating exactly? Leisure Suit Larry involves constant minigames with the end goal being "having sex with the hot foxies, we wear tight pants to show our bulges!", and this can last for hours on end as well.
Very good point here. Leisure Suit Larry provides the perfect example... nudity, sex, etc, much better graphics than GTA... it's ingame material you're meant to access... yet it gets an M, while this gets an AO?
I think the only explanation is that the ESRB is pandering to the politicians. I mean, it's not like this kind of content hasn't been in M-rated games before... yes, there is definitely a degree of randomness with some of their scores, but this just doesn't make sense. It looks to me like they're giving in to the critics who say that the AO rating should be used more often... but they just do not have a point. Let's compare to film. R does have limits on what it can show, but they're much higher limits than M-rated games now seem to have... if GTASA's new rating was reflected in movies there'd be a massive number of currently R-rated movies that should be getting relisted to NC-17...
My freind used a gameshark to get the cradle in Goldeneye ,The problem with the level is that if you fall off the edge you dont die like in single player but fall out of the "level" into a blue nothingness place.
There was a elevator that worked that brought you back up into the visible level out of the "blue area", I take it the cradle was originally planed to be in multiplayer but was not finnished in time so they locked it up and hid it away just for hacks to get.
The thing with GTA SA ,Even if it takes a mod to "unlock it", It was rocketstars doing that got it there, It can be accessed even on the console versions, Its not the same as a mod making a XXX addon to it would likely just be the pc version only that could get it and T2 could block it with a patch.
This has been overblown though, Most people have the console version and likely dont have the special "gadgets" needed to make it work, I think flashing this info around has just made people more aware about it who normally would not have known and they now probaily could head out and get the device and codes needed to unlock the files in the game.
Personally I am curious myself, I might just go try it out.
Why is sex so bad? Killing people isnt? But two people making love is worse then a number people blowing their brains out?
Technically kids should not have had it anyways being a "M" rated game, It was not meant for kids and if they got it who is to blaim for that? Rocketstar or the parent who used his creditcard ignorantly at EB?
Its like crying blood murder after you just takin your children to see a Porno intentionally!
Its a fucking porno its not meant to be "kid freindly".
One final thing, WTF was the perverted horny rocketstar guys doing anyways?
No, Rare didn't "keep it in there for hacks to get to". They scrapped it and had no idea anyone would later find the missing data and unlock it. It was effectively removed. They had no intention at all of anyone playing that level. They just kept the data there because there was no point deleting any and all code related to unused things, plus it's hard to say if some other part of the code didn't depend on that data without some extra testing. It's simply more cost effective to do otherwise.
Now, there's going to be a lot of heat about that sort of excuse. Passionate people HATE it when you say a solution was more cost effective, but sometimes it really is important to keep things like that in mind. Why force them to go to such extremes anyway? Is it to prevent people from hacking with the intention of finding hidden data? I just don't see the point.
Here's the thing. You assume that the console versions have it as some hidden content that some button code unlocks. As you know, a gameshark can unlock this stuff. That IS a mod. A mod doesn't have to be complicated, it just needs to modify existing code.
I won't judge a game because a game shark code can screw up the graphics saying "ya know, the game is great and all, but the mode unlocked when you put in this code has a lot of garbelled textures and isn't completable, they really should have thought that out, what a disappointment...".
I'm sure you would agree with that much at least, that we can't blame them for a game getting screwed up because we altered the code. By the same token I'd say we also can't blame them for other stuff.
Okay, let's put this differently. A standard alkaline battery is built pretty safe. If you store it in a cool dry place or just use it as it is intended, there is nothing you could complain about. However, if you modify it by splitting it open and then poor the battery acid into your eyes, then there's something pretty bad going on. That acid was in the battery BY DESIGN. There ARE alternative battery types that don't have this acid. Should they be held accountable for making batteries with ACID in them? Shouldn't they have forseen this and not just "put a warning on it" but just removed it outright?!
NO!
That person who opened up the battery exposed a hidden part, but they were never meant to actually get INTO the acid. The battery was meant to be placed in a device using that type, expended, and then disposed of properly.
This is the same thing.
Sure, in this case it's a lot less needed for the function of the game, though it may just have some calls to it that would make it risky to remove and much more cost effective to simply leave it in but unaccesible to the user, but it's pretty much the same thing. The stuff there isn't in the game when played using the official hardware without unliscensed modification. If someone comes along and modifies the code, whether the PC version with some hex editing or any console version using a Gameshark, whatever they get is their own fault, and can't be blamed on the game designers.
Sorry, but I can't see any logical reason for people to be upset at anyone other than the people who made the code modification.
I am not saying rocketstar should be forced to delay the game by having to remove and debug in a slow churning process everytime.
But why did they even think of putting that scene in the first place?A mini game at that?What was the point? of course it would be blocked by the ratings commision.
I think they should be abled to surmise what the ratings board would think, Given that the FCC didnt let "team america film" have that puppet sex scene even though they didnt have any visible genitilia.
I got to say they really pulled all the moves in the dvd uncensored version!
Well, this is the ESRB. They really can't out and out block the product. Their power is VERY limited. Even if it WAS included from the start, I'm fairly sure that the game would have got an M rating anyway. The current scandal over the hidden content wouldn't have happened.
As was pointed out, this isn't a first by any means. This stuff has been done in many games before this happened.
And why shouldn't they be allowed to consider making all sorts of extra stuff for the game? What's the harm in at least trying things out? They were in the privacy of Rockstar Studios, and should be allowed to do whatever coding they want there.
At least the ESRB didn't rerate it Rush's Moving Pictures.
Thank goodness for that!
By the way, I got San Andreas the other day [rated AO, not that it makes any difference to me]. Definitely a fun game and a lot better in every way than the previous two titles. The world is HUGE!! You have to drive through it to believe it. The downside really, in my opinion, was that every third word was an F-bomb. I guess maybe people in "da hood" really do talk that, but I just found it annoying.
Fart, fart you you fartin' farter!
Shake: That's not how f-bombs are dropped ya ijit!
Fudge...
Frylock: That's not an f-bomb.
<img src="http://www.vgcats.com/comics/images/050725.jpg">
I wonder if princess peach has a breast enlargement patch!
LMFAO!
If Any of you have the patch for Hotcoffee both me and my freind would greatly apreciate if you could give it to us!Know what all the fuss was about then get back to killing cops and prostitutes!
