Did you hear about IGN’s “Grand Theft Auto IV” montage that exclusively featured clips of the game’s lead character having sex and shooting the women he had sex with?
You won’t see it on IGN any longer. The gaming giant says it messed up and is taking it down.
“IGN’s goal is to show our users all aspects of popular games on the market,” an IGN spokesperson just informed me by e-mail. “In this case, we crossed a line in how we portrayed some aspects of the game and we’ve taken this video down.”
Yesterday, I discovered that IGN had made a video called “Ladies of Liberty City: Very Bad Things” that showcased just two elements “GTA” is notorious for and that some critics say is entirely what the game is about: sex and shooting women. This is how the video was teased on the site:
The video was a collection of “GTA IV” gameplay scenes. It starts with a montage of pole-dancing and lap-dancing. That’s followed by the drive-by shooting of a woman, then a visit to a strip club.
Footage of an acrobatic lap-dance is immediately followed by a scene of the game’s protagonist, Niko Bellic, gunning down a scantily-clad woman in the middle of the street.
Etcetera.
Why would IGN make a video like that?
- Did they think sex and the killing of prostitutes is an excellent combination for a video?
- Did they not think that but think their audience would give a video like that a lot of hits?
- Were they simply reporting the facts?
- Were they being ironic? (”Enjoy” the working girls, indeed.)
- Or did something just go wrong?
I reached out this morning to a spokesperson for Fox, which owns IGN and, after several hours while the video remained online, was told it’s now been removed.
IGN has made many other gameplay montages of “GTA,” but this is one I didn’t expect them to create. It already was making a poor impression (clips of the now-removed video can be seen at those links).
What do you think? Did IGN just do critics of the game a favor? Or was this pure “GTA” reflected back, warts and all?
May 6th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Am I the only one who thinks that the dismissal of misogyny and sexual violence in the game using reasoning like the game’s “about freedom”, and how it’s “an open world, a ’sandbox’, where you can do anything” is ironic, given that the game forces a player into a role of a heterosexual male? And I’m not even going to touch on the elements of the storyline that reinforce misogyny and violent masculinity (that would require a lot more time and words than should go into a comment).
Frankly, if the game were truly an “open world” devoted to “freedom” then there would be the option to play a female protagonist. Male sex workers would exist and the protagonist, regardless of gender, would be able to solicit them. There would be more realistic and complex consequences to one’s actions.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
So it’s “ok” to create a game that involves the random killing of prostitutes. So why not create a school shooting game? How would that work? How about a game where you kill disabled people, or people of color, or homosexuals?
Those games wouldn’t fly because they wouldn’t be accepted by society at large because they are distasteful and disgusting actions. Most people wouldn’t want to act those things out even in a video game.
So why is killing hookers “ok”? What’s the difference? Have we decided that some segments of society are easier to kill than others? If so, where does that road lead?
May 8th, 2008 at 12:03 am
@tekanji
A game like the one you mentioned, where the player is able to create their own character and play as either a male or a female protagonist is currently in development. It’s called “Saints Row 2″, but I’m sure you won’t agree with this game either since it’s pretty much just a gta spin-off minus the intelligent story and with added senseless violence (that’s what “saints row 1″ was like anyway). GTA IV’s main protagonist is determined beforehand because it allows R* to give him a detailed backstory and this serves the story immensely. He’s a heterosexual male so the target audience can relate to him.
Nobody here thinks misogony is cool and if they do, I’m pretty sure they had a lousy upbringing and didn’t get the idea from GTA.
@stwrinjn
I think you’ve misunderstood what the game is about. There’s no “kill-nearest-prostitute”-button on the joypad and none of the missions involve killing random prostitues. The open-world element means you’re set in this parody-version of New York and are free to drive around, proposition prostitues, use firearms and a lot of other stuff. Yes you can do distasteful things, but like you said: “Most people wouldn’t want to act those things out even in a video game.” and guess what, most people don’t do those things, not even in GTA IV.
R* has intentionally left out children and disabled people from the game, because if they where there, you’d be able to kill them (probably accidentally in a high speed car-chase). I don’t think anybody in their right mind would spend 60$ on a game just so they could walk around picking off prostitutes or black people or whatever. Anybody doing so would already be messed up.
Killing hookers isn’t okay. I agree that the video IGN posted was messed up, and it’s given a warped vision of what GTA IV is about. Mostly you kill other criminals, displaying the criminal underworld as a eat or be eaten world. The movie “The Godfather” did this, and it had scenes of a woman being abused, but The Godfather is still praised as one of the greatest movies ever made. The same with Martin Scorsese’s “Goodfellas”.
I think what scares people about GTA IV is the idea of their kid playing this game, commiting random acts of violence instead of following the games storyline, and getting ideas. Well keep GTA IV away from kids then! It’s labelled M for a reason.
May 8th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
What the hell,if you dont like it just dont play it you a–hole’s
Dont make it hard on the people who need to blow off some steam.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
This game is overly popular people play it all the time why should all you people just be freakin out about a game? Learn to live and realize that a game is a game, not life, now anyways… time to kill a hooker on GTA4 if I play it just for you guys having to whine about it.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:47 am
I found this whole topic fascinating! Having my coffee this morning and reading the whole hooker theme in GTA4. This game is not a by the book game- you choose to do what you want. You dont have to pick up a hooker, you dont have to have sex. Nico the main charchter has sex with the women he dates and nothing is shown. As for the killing of prostitutes again- choice- freedom of game play.. people are missing a big point here. This game is not about killing women. You kill men, black men (is it now racist), you kill a gay man (is it homophobia)? The game does not say pick up a hooker and have sex and then shoot her dead. After reading the posts I wonder now, why didnt Rockstar add in the male prostitute? I think if there was the option that Nico wanted a little *%??$$ from a guy and the player then chose to shoot the male prostitute- what would people be saying now? This way the prostitution isnt focusing so much on how the women hookers are being treated. Rockstar can probably do alot of damage control by adding a downloadable patch and add in some male hookers- this way everyone can relax a bit .. The game is very real- and odd that there are no male hustlers in the game…Also, not being a perv here- since I have the game and play it- not saying I want Nico to have some man on man action.. but if a player chooses that- takes the heat off “how women are portrayed in the game”..blah blah.. I havent even picked up a hooker in the game and really have no interest in doing it.. its all about CHOICE.. about the player.. its also just a Video Game……not a how to live your life guide. What this game shows is nothing different then what Hollywood films… Rockstar good job- great game- throw is some male hustlers to even out the controversy.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:46 am
All you guys! Its a game.Almost every game with this type of content has something good and something on the not so good side.Its just a game.You control what happens with you in real life. So if there are people who mistake their cute little TVs for an alternate chance at life.. Then they suck
May 25th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
—-ok now its just a game(im gon get yelled at ) but even in items in the movies industry like stupid ?~$$ like prom night or somthing else dumb. dont get mad over a game see somthing that has a mature gamer tag on it… dont get it… see someone with any tag that you dont like…dont get it. to me this show a feww real life subject within life that we think is sooo perfect. i have this game and its one of me favoriots; not because of the huge amount of drugs, violence, sex, or misguided use… its because of the graphics and the great design of gaming… grow down to a gamers point of view———————————————————————-
May 27th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Lemme first say I agree wholeheartedly with the article. C’mon IGN.
I’m sick of hearing “just a game”. It’s like a kindergartener saying “my invisible friend did it!”.
No art form exists in a vacuum.I love games, I play games, but really. I heard once on a podcast (and this is paraphrased since my memory is a bit broken at the moment, but I believe Sean Elliot said it) “When people see Jack Thompson, we lament, ‘but games are art!’. When people hold us accountable, we scream ‘it’s just a game you retard, it’s just a game!!1″ All art forms are social commentary. And no, we don’t have to grow down. $~#?~ that. Most of us are intelligent here. I’m not going to wear an idiot stamp because I play GTA and other violent games.
@Eleniel
… I think I see your point, a bit. What you were trying to say- and I repeat it so I can understand it more clearly- is due to the fact a Rockstar knowingly made sexual-violence exclusive to women, it is misogynist, and wrong.
What everyone else is saying is either it’s just a game (grow up), or That it’s a sandbox, so you can break the toys if you want.
I believe we’re arguing over different things.
Still, I do agree, as an intelligent male, this is unequal. Prostitutes are people. For the religious, Mary was a prostitute. For the political, Gandhi’s son was a prostitute. It’s not equal.
But does it have to be? I mean, do we need two prostitutes for each corner, one male, one female? Are we that insecure? There’s a limited amount of time for development, especially something as big as GTA. Is it possible it was…overlooked? Maybe they considered it something neat for the sequel? I’ve heard lots of conversation about the misogyny in GTA, not just here. Trust me, by GTA 5 we’ll have a good amount of people asking for higher writing standards from Rockstar. Rockstar is not a giant walking R. There are people there with very different levels of maturity- which is why it can be so deep yet hit the lowbrow humor so much.
Who knows? Maybe a Russian girl will be in next one, and terrorize San Andreas’s male prostitutes.
PS: Do you know the backlash that male prostitutes would cause? Mark my words, the VERY SAME people who revile GTA (besides Deande, who’s just being a good parent) are most likely going to do backflips when they see that. There’s more than enough crazy nutjobs (including he-who-shall-not-be-named-but rhymes-with-ompson) on our case, I don’t think we need to throw homophobics in here. You can call me out for being a hypocrite, but those are the facts. I wouldn’t mind a homosexual centered game, but not when it’s the center of a media-s***storm. Not until we can iron out our collective PR, neh?
@Steve
It’s the loony tunes effect. Our society loves violence- to the point where even fatal violence can be comical. A lot of it’s the human need to laugh at absurdity and irony- I saw a comic of someone knocked out by a safety helmet. I laughed.
PS: I got so mad when I saw the reply. So, video games, don’t have messages? Really?
June 4th, 2008 at 4:19 am
It really dumbfounds me that people divert their energy from the true
“culprit” and attack IGN for this. Everything that is possible in the game is possible because Rockstar, the DEVELOPER, has designed it so. People classifying others as ’sick’, ‘wrong’, or any other derogatory slur simply because they choose to experiment with the sandbox-type (the entire purpose of it being you can dynamically play how you WANT to play, the designer doesn’t have to hold your hand, making your choices for you, nudging you along on a singular direct path) gameplay in a VIDEOGAME is really a new low. My out-of-touch-alarmist meter is flying off the charts!
Some people here are pissing in the proverbial wind trying to prove how videogames with sex and violence are the cause of all the world’s ills/are immoral/teach bad values (teaching, that’s your job, remember?). I’m now inclined to ask you to provide some evidence that this is as serious as you “believe”, not as you KNOW, because to know you would once again REQUIRE some EVIDENCE.
Videogames.
June 15th, 2008 at 3:55 am
Who the $%$% cares? if you dont like the game dont play it? its a free world where everyone is entitled to carjack snipe coppers,pick a hooker up kill her and get your money back…..stop trying to censor us!!….i f—ing hate censorship…..bigger bigots then the people they try to attack….i applaud Rockstar games for taing an open mind approach with a sarcastic reply to these arrogant a–holes who have nothing better to do then complain because there lifes are so shitty and depressing