diomedesxx

samaine

geekgrrl

and while i was reading this, i thought 'wow, there should be a kotaku chicago party' but the more i read, the less i wanted to meet half of these assholes. sorry, dudes.

MobileMilitia

Man, Chicago has some messed up priorities.

ChrowX

Fitz Rhapsody, I applaud you for making an interesting counter argument. I can tell you put a lot of time into thinking about it and explaining it, which is more that can be said of some of the people who tried to respond -- or bash -- you.

I understand your point that people have a right to be offended by advertisements that appear insensitive, especially after a tragedy that hits close to home.

Perhaps CTA should have discussed these concerns with Rockstar following the wave of gun violence in Chicago. Perhaps they could have negotiated an agreement for changing/scaling down the ad campaign in a way that suited both CTA's interests in being mindful of the tragic loss of life and Rockstar's interests in promoting its game.

That said, it does sound like CTA violated its contractual agreement with Rockstar by simply yanking the advertisements following media attention from Fox News and others.

Although some people claim these advertisements are aimed at young children and promote violence, I disagree.

In their current form, the advertisements have artistic merit, and do not appear to represent weapons or acts of violence. I can think of countless movie advertisements that feature weapons or violent looking imagery, but these GTA advertisements wisely -- and likely purposefully -- do not.

For this reason, I do not think the ads are necessarily inflammatory or socially negligent, other than the fact that they promote a videogame that is known to have violent material in it -- but none more so than your average rated "R" movie.

So -- in a way -- I feel that GTA is unfairly being singled out, simply because violence in videogames is still considered less acceptable than violence in movies, simply because people tend to stereotype videogames as an activity for teens and kids.

However, we know that this is not true anymore. People of all ages play videogames, including a large number of people in their mid to late '20s and '30s who grew up playing Nintendo and have graduated to more adult-themed games.

So perhaps it is prudent for Rockstar to defend its contractual agreements and 1st amendments rights from knee-jerk reactions based on stereotypes of video games.

That said, I can understand why people in Chicago are concerned about the upswing in violence, and may be more sensitive to advertisements they consider to be insensitive.

DugDawg

Gray665

boopadoo

Puck

@Fitz Rhapsody: It's called capitalism. Capitalism is what America is all about. Morality does not enter the equation.

axiomatic

Whether anyone was offended, whether pulling the ads was good PR for CTA, whether there's a violence problem in Chicago is all completely irrelevant with regards to a potential suit.

Take-Two and the CTA signed a contract, CTA breached it. You can't partially breach a contract - either you're following it to the letter or you're not.

It's common sense not to sign contracts you cannot or will not honour, and it's common sense that you will suffer consequences. That's the point of contracts.

Koztah

the CTA removed the ads before the end of the contract, hence this became a breach of contract, so unless CTA refunds whatever money Take 2 gave them, then they're looking for a lawsuit.

Zantagor

Jambolia

They aren't money mongering assholes, if you were to pay me $300,000 for advertising and I remove all your ads (defeating the purpose of advertising) and I didn't give it back to you I'm pretty sure you'd be pissed. They are basically suing to get their money back. According to the article, they are suing for damages, for $300,000 (it says "at least," I assume they might charge a bit more so they can pay their lawyers and for time wasted.) It isn't money mongering, it's doing business, you apparently cannot see that.

It's simple. Someone took money and didn't complete the service for which the money was given. They didn't give them a refund. They get sued. That's real life, get over it, I hope Rockstar wins, they should get their money back.

Covert_Knight

Kytano-Skorpius

In a situation like Chicago's, Rockstar was selfish, money-mongering, and careless in deciding to take the CTA to court rather than reach a compromise on their advertising. Yes, it was a business transaction, and sometimes business transactions get altered. Had the CTA said "people in Chicago are sensitive over shootings right now, so we're going to remove some ads," any decent company in the world would have said "okay, let's re-negotiate or get a refund or something." But not Rockstar.

Rockstar is just a money-mongering asshole of a company that doesn't really care about anything but profits. It's been obvious ever since the entire Take-Two stock situation. You seem to forget that it's just a greedy company and doesn't care about stepping all over people like the millions in Chicago who rely on public transit to get around.

@Pornosaur: I agree that Rockstar should be compensated, but the Reuters story stated that they want compensation in addition to the re-addition of the ads and possibly more (probably to cover legal fees). Like I said before, I just thought it was a dick move for Rockstar to go straight for a lawsuit rather than negotiate to run the ads later, give them a refund, or work out some other sort of deal.

Fitz Rhapsody

Americo

Americo

Pornosaur

But, seriously, the CTA has no money. Suing it will earn the enmity of all Chicagoans. People were already trapped for hours in the blue line tunnel last month.

Slatz_Grobnik

Pornosaur

You need to learn how to read too. This isn't about responsible advertising. This is about paying for a service and not having it rendered. This is business, not a case for idiotic moral police like you.

Silenthillnight

Right, because Fox news is just sooo liberal. You ignorant fuck.

Silenthillnight

if anything, the stories of the ads being pulled added MORE publicity to the game.

frank0127

Remember when they had to rush some post-production of the original Spider-Man movie to remove the World Trade Center, since the film was shot before 9/11? Did Marvel Studios have to do that? No. They did it to prevent being tasteless. Because they knew a lot of people were sensitive about the event. Because they didn't want to stew up extremely negative, sensitive memories in massive amounts of people.

The CTA pulled some ads (again: did you even read my post?) to prevent being tasteless. You love video games, so you think they should be able to do whatever they want. Whatever. I love video games, too. But I also realize there are sensitive people in the world, and in some sensitive cases - especially cases like over 30 people being shot dead in one month in Chicago - free speech should be exercised responsibly and respectfully, not just thrown around to get a cheap buck.

Do you really think removing a couple bus ads is going to hurt the biggest game launch in history? Do you really think Rockstar needed to sue a company that is well-known for being horribly under-funded, for which millions rely on for transportation on a daily basis, for deciding to exercise good taste following sensitive events?

Think about the big picture for once, people. This isn't about a video game company "getting shafted because people say video games cause violence," this is about a very public company exercising good taste and choosing to responsibly exercise the right of free speech.

Fitz Rhapsody

TimLyons

oosiegewolfoo

Haven't you ever heard of free speech? People are going to be offended by this, but that doesn't mean it should be taken down. The only ones who should be able to take it down is Rockstar if they feel it's inappropriate.

Karazzin

Karazzin

CREEPINGvDEATH

Rockstar can go straight to hell. Chicago already has one of the lowest-rated transportation systems of any big city in the country, and Rockstar suing it isn't going to help - even if it is insured by bullshit like this.

First of all, Mayor Daley has recently been putting the spotlight on not only the poor performance and quality of the CTA, but also on the plague of gun violence. From a PR standpoint, had the CTA not announced that it was going to pull the ads, it would have resulted in nothing less than outrage from pretty much everyone in Chicago. The CTA did what it had to do, in my eyes.

None of you seem to understand that all the CTA did was say they were going to pull the ads. There's a gigantic GTA IV ad literally a block away from my apartment, at a CTA bus stop, so I know they haven't removed all the ads. Maybe they toned some of the advertising down in select areas - such as, I don't know, maybe the ones in the areas that have had to deal with a mass epidemic of shooting recently? And I, for one, am pretty okay with the ads being removed from those areas.

Before everyone pisses all over me for saying "video games don't cause violence," you need to realize that in a situation like Chicago's recent gun violence, that's not relevant. Whether GTA IV causes violence is irrelevant. People, especially adults, can be very sensitive after tragic events, especially if they were connected to victims - such as the recent shootings in Chicago. And any form of media that glorifies or includes emulation in any way of an event that devastated someone's life can be viewed as tasteless and offensive.

For example, my mom lives near NIU and was in a nearby shopping mall about a week after the NIU shootings in February. She walked into a Hot Topic to see a gigantic display in the middle of the store for the band "Bullet for My Valentine," and was horrified and extremely offended. In her eyes, the sheer name "Bullet for My Valentine" was more than a little reminiscent of the NIU shooting that took place on Valentine's Day, and it was viewed as more than a little tasteless that a roommate, girlfriend, or parent of a victim of that shooting could walk into a store with a gigantic display reminiscent of that horrible tragedy just days after it occurred. And I agree with that sentiment.

Am I saying that Hot Topic should have pulled all of its "Bullet for My Valentine" merchandise off of its shelves? No. I'm saying it shouldn't have been displayed like a golden pedestal in the middle of the store. And the same goes for GTA IV. Was Mayor Daley saying to ban the game, or pull it from store shelves, or take down all advertisements? No. Nothing even close. Some ads were removed. That was it. And now every single one of the millions of people like me who depend on the already morbidly underfunded CTA every day to get to work have to endure a lawsuit because the makers of the game that yielded the highest-grossing and highest-selling launch in history decided that their precious product didn't squeeze enough attention out of areas that have been stricken with gun violence that so obviously reminds the families and loved ones of recent victims of the plight they had to suffer only weeks ago.

So I'm fully supportive of the CTA's announcement to pull the ads, which most of you don't seem to realize was done just as much out of respect for the loved ones of recent victims as any other reason they claimed when pulling the ads. Not to mention that I don't know if they removed 10% or 50% or 90% of the ads - the fact is, I still see plenty around the city, on buses and at bus stops. And I know for a fact that a lot of people in Chicago feel the same way; just because it's a big city and pretty liberal doesn't mean that a lot of people can't be a little conservative about some things - after all, it's the midwest.

Rockstar should have tried to work out some sort of settlement or compromise with the CTA before pulling a dick move like this. As far as I'm concerned, their reputation is even worse than EA's to me. And now I don't even think I'm going to buy GTA IV (not that I was really seriously considering it before this, anyway).

Fitz Rhapsody

PhantomVI

Sounds like they got in the bag to nail FOX News for the pressure they created on the CTA for it to be removed.

yashichi8bit

Yes there are the negative effects of videogames, but FOX always seems to create a monster.

They need to lose hefty sum of money for them to wake up and be more critical on BOTH sides of videogames.

Fyren

I don't understand why the ads were pulled to begin with. It seems like people have a problem with the brand altogether, and won't tolerate it being seen or mentioned in public. What a damn shame.

j14rk1n

"... why the CTA was displaying paid for advertising for the Rockstar title."

... is a nonsensical statement.

wild_world_girl

wild_world_girl

okenny :)

robinandtami

Danin

HomerSapien

Covert_Knight

EmerilLIVE

KevinMassacre

sisedi

And at the same time, not accusing you of this, but that reasoning would hold that because taxpayers must foot the bill for a tort, then a public entity cannot be found responsible for anything. And that is worse.

Owen Good

marissa_melee

Imagine this from their perspective: "Hey, this game company's giving us a bunch of money to put ads on our buses!" Then FOX News comes out with a overly-negative story upon these ads, which just happen to be on their buses. They get scared, because they didn't realize that they were promoting an 'ultra-violent murder simulator'. So, they pull it. Now Take-Two's suing them.

Anyways, yeah, they're idiots for pulling the ads, but I thought it was pretty humorous to overly-simplify things.

HomerSapien

Albanian_Killa

goldwings

I seriously doubt the contact had a term past that exceeded 2 months anyhow.

Patient

SpadeAce

@The Crimson Phantom: OOH! OOH! Allow me!

@TxKARATEDUDE: FOX NEWS IS A CONSERVATIVE NETWORK, DUMBASS!
You just insulted liberals for an action taken by conservatives.
I'm sorry, but that needed to be said.
Whether or not Liberals or Conservatives reign supreme is not the issue. The point is you just became a blatant hypocrite.

PS: On a personal note, the ACLU is run by liberals, not conservatives. The book-burning mobile is run by conservatives.

Palladium

DuskyDawny

Kenny

Interesting to find the above article on Reuters, it's from a blog but nevertheless has a clear stance on the side of GTA.

The writer of the aforementioned article has a good point: gamers have matured, we're grown up, we want mature titles. Grand Theft Auto has been, by all means, "over the top" in the past, residing snugly in a gratuitous niche of violence and action. The most recent effort however seems to have taken notice of exactly the influence it has in media, and I don't mean as a "killing simulator" as some crack-pot Floridian litigators may pin it as.

Rockstar realizes they represent a large part of the gaming majority, including the hardcore audience we see on this site. As such I think they've done a good job making GTA4 a grand effort in maturing the series as a whole and it deserves to be held in the same regard we're holding other violent media but it's not. There's a confusion between those that are in the firm belief it's a piece of well made entertainment and those that cannot be swayed from thinking it's the sole factor corrupting America today. Things are coming to a head and a decision needs to be made sometime soon as to where these sorts of games ultimately stand.

I hope the CTA gets what's coming to them.

Absent Blue

I'd sue that guy for making me waste my time and wonder why his name is dumb.

Amazon_Chris

If the CTA did break with its contract with R* to pull the ads, then R* should certainly sue them for that, but the free speech claim is a little bogus.

DrWyrm

I'm going to let someone else point on the faulty logic on this one.

The Crimson Phantom

(俗・ ) Grey Gecko

Xcite79

its possible you cant find the video because fox news did not air it.

minus_273

Don't vote 4 B. Hussein Obama... or the chick either.

TxKARATEDUDE

poduski

Athest

ocalot

Willows

These ads were rightfully paid for, and they do not in any way, shape or form, negatively affect the public. If the public is going to b*tch about ads, let's get b*tching on all the other ads there are out there. Sex being promoted everywhere I go, whether its a new stupid shaving cream, or some deodorant, it just can't be advertised in my face without having some nearly naked woman plastered along the side of a bus.

Thanks Weazel News for standing up for our rights.

Covert_Knight

okenny :)

silkylove

ferrari28

[joffrey.com]
I did a random google search for CTA ads and found this. Tell me how the ad to the left with a blood stain and the word "MURDER" on it is less violent than the GTA ads.

ferrari28

Witzbold

HomerSapien

Truepatriot

I would like all ads for McDonalds pulled. They cause more physical damage to our youth than this game ever will.

I hope someone can see how completely absurd the "controversy" is surrounding GTA4.

yourenzyme

Kaizuden

kylo4

buttchin6

Phenom88

BlackDove

inn1t

Ozzieball

Oofgeg