The age of a fictional character doesn't effect the legality of the game in the US (maybe some other countries, but not in this great nation of liberty). The US constitution and the Supreme Court (who's job it is to uphold the constitution) are on the game maker's side in this issue.
If you are a parent have no legal recourse against a game company, even if your child gets killed by a madman who'd been "inspired" to commit a crime because of a game he'd played. It's been too court numerous times, and the US constitution's right to free speech has ALWAYS won. Did you know under the George W Bush presidency, that his conservative congress actually passed a law that would ban any anime pictures which depicted fictional underage characters being raped (which to anime fans is known as "lolicon hentai")? The US Supreme Court quickly struck down that law. Yes the Supreme Court must uphold the constitution, and has so far done so even for very offensive material. Are you aware that one judge's opinion (I'm not sure but I believe at the time he was a Supreme Court justice) in a case involving material which possibly could inspire someone to commit a crime said this:
"Speech, even if it has a tendency to increase the likelihood that someone may commit a crime, is not a reason to ban that speech".
This is a VERY powerful ruling, as it basically means that the ONE AND ONLY argument people have had to call for the banning of violent video games is NO REASON AT ALL to ban such violent video games. So far I think the only speech that is illegal is making a direct threat of harm against someone.
If there ever was a suit against Rockstar games, Rockstar would have the law on their side, and the plaintiff would therefore lose the case quite quickly. Sure people can do what they can to try to hurt Rockstar's business, like holding a boycott, but that won't be effective because the only people who'd go with such a boycott would be those who already hate the game and this "kids in the game" would have been the final straw for them. But since they already hated the game, they'd NEVER have been potential customers. Rockstar would lose no money. Gamers in general, and especially GTA fans, would have no reason to support such a boycott or protest. Rockstar's customers would stay their customers, and they would NOT lose any money (at least not in an amount that would be noticeable to their overall budget plan). In fact they might gain MORE customers, who's previous complaint was that the game was too unrealistic without kids in it.
Edited by Videogamer555, 16 October 2011 - 11:15 PM.