Warren Spector slams GTA

By Ellie Gibson Published 7 November, 2005

And lazy devs in general.

Warren Spector, the former studio head of Ion Storm Austin and the brains behind Deus Ex, has slammed game developers for relying on tried and tested formulas instead of coming up with new ideas.

Speaking at the Montreal Game Summit in an interview with The Canadian Press news agency, Spector had particularly strong words for Rockstar and Grand Theft Auto - which he described as the "ultimate urban thuggery simulation."

"I'm really angry at the Rockstar guys. Not like I'm going to go beat them up and yell at them, but they frustrate me because Grand Theft Auto III, in particular, was an amazing advance in game design," Spector told The Canadian Press.

"It was a stunning accomplishment as a game design. And it was wrapped in a context that completely for me undid all the good they did on the design side."

Spector went on: "It's like I want to tell my mother: 'This is what games can be.' But I can't because they don't get past the beating people up with a baseball bat, stealing cars and crashing them, and the foul language and stuff, and I don't think it is necessary.

"I sure wish they would apply the same level of design genius to something we really could show enriches the culture instead of debases it."

Spector argued that while sticking with successful formulas can result in healthy profits, "Stagnation is not the friend of any medium - and anybody who thinks it is is going to go out of business."

He also discussed the difficulties for independent developers facing inflated production costs, and the importance of developing games for a more diverse audience.

Spector announced the formation of his own studio, Junction Point, back in March of this year. At the time the studio was said to be working on a fantasy title, but no further details have been released since.

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (63) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Fozzie_bear #1 6 years ago

    Well said that man. Videogames will be seen as the exclusive domain of male adolescent halfwits for as long as stuff like GTA is the most visible and most successful gaming franchise out there.

  • Fatfish #2 6 years ago

    @ Fozzie - But it is, isn't it? ;)

    Completely agreed. Innovation is the key to success.......so our marketing people keep telling us.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 12:24

  • Bezzy #3 6 years ago

    I know that a lot of devs will want to complain that there's no way to stay in business without sex, guns, drugs and violence, but I think that this is basically what Warren is decrying - not that developers do it, but that developers have no CHOICE but to do it. That's the symptom of a sickly medium. It needs some aspirin - games which make people realize that there's more to play than just "fun".

  • Sko #4 6 years ago

    Hasn't Warren worked on his own fair share of sequels?

  • Bezzy #5 6 years ago

    disc - that's so goddamn unfair I don't even know where to start.

    sko - yeah, but that's his point. So many developers are working on licenses or sequels - they don't necessarily want to, but the business dictates that they must to even be able to do what they love as a job! It's sort of sad, even if it's understandable.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 12:29

  • Artemus #6 6 years ago

    Thief 3 was excellent, DX2 not so. But then that's what happens when you start developing for the console masses.

  • Teeth #7 6 years ago

    disc, I think you missed Spector's point.

  • Bezzy #8 6 years ago

    Hardly.

    Killing in Thief and Deus Ex has never been necessary to achieve victory (except for 1 or 2 mandatory main characters). There have always been viable alternatives to killing, and killing itself is not glorified.

    Compare that to GTA - you can live peacefully, sure, but the likelyhood is, you won't be able to progress in the story. Your basic verbeage in the game is criminal. It almost impossible to express yourself in the game without breaking a law. The main character speaks only in bulletholes.

    Don't get me wrong. I really love the game, and have no problem with the violence, but to say that Spector is being a hypocrit is a bit strong - he's obviously put the thought in to enable a wide range of expression at the very lowest level.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 12:40

  • matt__jon #9 6 years ago

    Somebodies jealous.

    About GTA, if its really that old, just let it burn out over time. Thats what Rockstars gonna do anyway, they're gonna milk this game for everything it has. I personally thought SA was the best in the series, so much more to do than the others.

  • Genji #10 6 years ago

    @Artemus: Thief 3, as I seem to remember, was developed for the "console masses" too. That, as you said, turned out pretty damn well.

    He's right - the current GTA games represent the best and the worst aspects of videogaming today.

    I have nothing but respect for the man who brought me Deus Ex.

  • Genji #11 6 years ago

    Deus Ex shits all over GTA.
    Pardon my French. ;)

  • KiLlerKnight #12 6 years ago

    Yeah, Jack has a friend now.

  • Freek #13 6 years ago

    You mean Thief, in wich you play a criminal who kills gaurds in order to steal valuables? Or knocks them on the back of the head with a club?

    And it is nessairy. Most games involve killing your enemies to progress, par for the course. GTA just allows you to do that all NPC simply because it is about doing what ever you want to do. You don't have to beat up innoncent bystanders with a baseball bat if you don't want too. You can just concentrate and the regualr mission with regular enemies.
    GTA also takes crime movies as an inspiration, kind of a parodie on the genre and does it briliantly with plenty of humor. There's allot of other games wich jump on the bandwagon just for the sake of it but GTA isn't one of them.

    The contraversie surrounding it is all hype and no substance, partly whipped up by Rockstars own marketing department. Supposedly the "Ban this sick filth" article was created by a publisist they hired themselfs.
    They revel in it, it's the way they want to sell thier games. If you're going to be angry atleast be angry for the right reasons.

  • smelly #14 6 years ago

    " it. That's the symptom of a sickly medium. It needs some aspirin - games which make people realize that there's more to play than just "fun". "


    Unfortunately, joe public see's non-violent games, or indeed games which are just fun.. as instaneously "kiddy" games.. and as such cack. Bloody chavs the lot of em.

  • Sko #15 6 years ago

    Bezzy - but he wasn't though. He wasn't saying "I'm stuck producing retreads and clichés because of the industry", he was pointing at Rockstar and GTA and faulting them. It kinda implies he thinks his particular shit don't stink.

  • kangarootoo #16 6 years ago

    "Unfortunately, joe public see's non-violent games"

    I think this is a myth. Joe Public doesn't play games, they do other stuff. The current core games market might see non-violent games as boring, but they aren't the general public. If we started producing more games that were intriguing instead of controversial we might actually get Joe Public interested.

    To wheel out the standard response, take a look at Sims. Huge sales figures but uber non violent. The only people who really still believe that all the public wants is violent vidofits of GTA are marketing teams who aren't good enough to sell something different.

  • speedjack #17 6 years ago

    What a load of tosh.

    I remember reading a interview with Spector several years ago where all he did was go on about what a wonderful game GTAIII was... so its obviously taken a while to decide its actually now offensive to him.

    I think Rockstar have really pushed each game forwards. You can also see a real effort to make improvements on every iteration since, to the extent that some now claim San Andeas had to may bells and whistles.

    If it seems old then thats possibly because there have been so many other games that have since ripped off the whole 'free-roaming-digital-sandbox' thing since.

    Don't blame Rockstar for that.

  • dk_rare #18 6 years ago

    Warren is an industry great. If he talks, you listen. If you disagree, at least respect and validate his argument before you make yours. If you arn't ready to listen to people that work in the industry (even if you disagree) then you don't deserve to vocalise your own opinions (as you are too stupid to listen to other peoples)

  • kalel #19 6 years ago

    Hmmm, I kinda agree with him and general, but I think his attack on GTA is very unfair. While I agree that the sequals have cynically played the violence card, I think GTA3 was actually a very humourous and toungue in cheek game, and I think it was a proper game for gamers. It was't really until San Andreas that I started to disappove of Rockstars antic.

  • Tonka #20 6 years ago

    Warren Spector on GTAII (in this article)
    Grand Theft Auto III, in particular, was an amazing advance in game design
    It was a stunning accomplishment as a game design
    This is what games can be

    He obviously still thinks that it's a great game. I think he just thinks it's a waste of a grate game play to wrap it all up in a 'thugs are cool' theme over and over again.

  • Teeth #21 6 years ago

    "He obviously still thinks that it's a great game. I think he just thinks it's a waste of a grate game play to wrap it all up in a 'thugs are cool' theme over and over again. "

    Thank you Tonka. That's the point, boys.

  • kangarootoo #22 6 years ago

    @Speedjack

    "I think Rockstar have really pushed each game forwards. You can also see a real effort to make improvements on every iteration since"

    I can't agree with that. I thought there were some issues in GTA3 that still haven't been fully addressed, but rather put by the roadside in favour of expanding the volume of content.

    I don't really agree with the way Warren made his point, but I think the underlying issue is reasonable. Personally I just want to play great games, I don't really mind if they are sequels. I would like new/improved mechanics though even if the game is a sequel. I think the GTA series hasn't really moved forwards much in this area.

    If anyone can list some core improvements made between GTA3 and GTA:SA I'd be happy to hear them (and I'm sure there are some, so its a genuine question, just not enough for my liking).

    Just so its clear what my take on this is, adding more square footage of ground doesn't count, being able to fly helicopters does (but only just, as it is really just an extendion of the car mechanic).

  • dk_rare #23 6 years ago

    Good post Tonka : ) Is good to see that some people can understand what he is getting at. His granny might be impressed with the gameplay, if say it was driving to the shop to buy more catfood, instead of running people over and baseball bats meets heads. And yes, GTA3 was (and is) great, GTA SA was questionable (plus too many bells and whistles?) but liberty stories totally sums up his anger, old thug forumula, wrapped up and re-released.

    This one is actually some of my own opinion too, so don't confuse my opinions with Warrens ^_^

  • Teeth #24 6 years ago

    "If anyone can list some core improvements made between GTA3 and GTA:SA I'd be happy to hear them (and I'm sure there are some, so its a genuine question, just not enough for my liking). "

    m0t0rb1k3s!!1 FTW

  • Teeth #25 6 years ago

    He hasn't dressed a great game design up with violence, making it completely unacceptable to parents. Has he?

  • Madder-Max #26 6 years ago

    Who really gives a shit what he thinks?

  • ecureuil #27 6 years ago

    GTA is fun. End of story.

  • Stoatboy #28 6 years ago

    Ask someone who knew nothing about games ten years ago to name a videogame and chances are they'd name Pacman, or Mario, or even Space Invaders, and wouldn't have a problem with it.

    Ask the same person today and there's a good chance they'd choose GTA, and quite probably take issue with it.

    And whilst saying that Spector is guilty of the same sins has some truth behind it, it's fairly obvious that Rockstar absolutely revel in creating games that are awash with violence, criminality and death to seek headlines and notoriety.

    People put 2 and 2 together and come up with any number of answers greater than 4 all the time - if one of the most visible developers is seen to be making games that absolutely delight in crime and violence then chances are people are going to assume that that's what the industry is all about.

    IMO, Rockstar have become the face of the industry to the average Daily Mail reader, which isn't a happy thought. I loved GTA3 and Vice City (and wanted to like SA, but couldn't), but in no way are they good flagships for the industry.

  • paulf #29 6 years ago

    I had a look on the interweb to find the best selling games and got this top 20 from wikipedia (cant guarantee its authenticity) Console Games only (not counting bundled software)

    * Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES - 17.28 Million)
    * Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (PS2 - 12 Million)
    * Super Mario Land 2 (Game Boy - 11.09 Million)
    * Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (PS2 - 11 million)
    * Gran Turismo (PS1 - 10.5 million)]]
    * Gran Turismo 2 (PS1 - 8.5 million)
    * Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (PS2 - 8.5 Million)
    * Super Mario Kart (SNES - 8 Million)
    * Final Fantasy VII (PS1 - 7.8 Million)
    * Super Mario Bros. 2 (NES - 7.46 Million)
    * GoldenEye 007 (N64 - 7.4 Million)
    * Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (PS2 - 7.3 million)
    * Mario Kart 64 (N64 - 7.04 million)
    * Gran Turismo 3 (PS2 - 7 Million)
    * Final Fantasy X (PS2 - 6.60 million)
    * Grand Theft Auto III (PS2 - 6.23 million)
    * Super Smash Bros. (N64 - 4.7 million)
    * Dragon Quest VII (PS1 - 4.12 million)
    * Pokémon Stadium (N64 - 4.11 million)
    * Donkey Kong 64 (N64 - 3.97 million)

    So out of them theres the 3 gtas and goldeneye that have 'real world violence' suggesting that a game don't have to be violent to be popular

  • rogermellie #30 6 years ago

    Well I hope he's developing Ultima Underworld 3, Black Gate the Return, System Shock 3 or something similar :-)

    I wouldn't care if it wasn't innovative.

    Sadly, I know the audience for those kind of games (me) isn't large enough to cover his costs.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 14:36

  • Bezzy #31 6 years ago

    System Shock's spiritual successor is BioShock and is being developed by Irrational Boston.

  • KiLlerKnight #32 6 years ago

    'Warren is an industry great. If he talks, you listen. If you disagree, at least respect and validate his argument before you make yours. If you arn't ready to listen to people that work in the industry (even if you disagree) then you don't deserve to vocalise your own opinions (as you are too stupid to listen to other peoples) '

    Pile of BS. He ain't God, you know.

  • Madder-Max #33 6 years ago

    "If you arn't ready to listen to people that work in the industry (even if you disagree) then you don't deserve to vocalise your own opinions (as you are too stupid to listen to other peoples) ' "

    Classic basic, defensive psycholog that people employ when they dont have the capacity for reasoned debate nor the abillity to accept or respond to criticism. makes me laugh. Accuse dissenters of being stupid for not agreeing. Fuck off is what I say to that tactic!

    /Proud to be stupid

  • Bezzy #34 6 years ago

    "Classic basic, defensive psycholog that people employ when they dont have the capacity for reasoned debate nor the abillity to accept or respond to criticism. makes me laugh. Accuse dissenters of being stupid for not agreeing. Fuck off is what I say to that tactic!"

    Classic basic, defensive psycholog that people employ when they dont have the capacity for reasoned debate nor the abillity to accept or respond to criticism. makes me laugh. Accuse dissenters of being stupid for not agreeing. Fuck off is what I say to that tactic!

  • Sko #35 6 years ago

    He's merely Jack-lite. Having decided that the murders in his games are acceptable, he's decided that everything beyond is crossing a moral border of his own choosing. All gussied up with a hypocritical 'stagnation' vibe.

  • Kiigan #36 6 years ago

    Give the people what they want. Right now, they mostly just want more GTA. It's a shame, but that's the situation we are in and given how hard it is to place original content in the marketplace you can hardly blame developers for being a bit cautious. Sure, we grandiose motherfucking geeky gamers can be as snobby as we like about innovative gameplay, but when it comes down to it the majority of people who actually buy games just don't give a shit. EA didn't get as wealthy as they have by sheer accident.

    Certainly, innovation is very nice now and then, but its importance is vastly overstated here. If the game entertains you for a good amount of time, is well-made and you feel you got your money's worth, does it matter that it isn't a genre-busting ground-breaking piece of innovative design?

    Also, I think Spector is way off on this. GTA3 was no great achievement in terms of design. It's just GTA1 in 3D. And GTA in turn was just Elite. The leap from GTA2 to GTA3 was a fantastic technical achievement, but not a notable design achievement.
    I don't understand his perspective on violence either... by no means does the representation of violence cheapen the value of the game design.

    Lastly, Warren has done his own fair share of derivative sequels himself, as has been pointed out.

  • Kiigan #37 6 years ago

    Warren Spector said:

    "It's like I want to tell my mother: 'This is what games can be.' But I can't because they don't get past the beating people up with a baseball bat, stealing cars and crashing them, and the foul language and stuff, and I don't think it is necessary."

    First of all - this game isn't aimed at your mother. And the violence and foul language is entirely necessary, when the game you are making is about being a goddamn gangster.

    "I sure wish they would apply the same level of design genius to something we really could show enriches the culture instead of debases it."

    Why is the representation of violence in videogames "debasement of culture" necessarily? Violence is a part of the human condition, a part of all our lives, and violent roleplay can be both entertaining and culturally valuable. Many great, culturally significant books, movies, plays, paintings are extremely violent. In fact some are far more violent in their imagery than any of the cartoonish violence we see in our games).

    Warren seems to me to be the worst kind of videogame apologist. Don't look to your goddamn mother for acceptance of your job or your hobby. GTA without violence and foul language wouldn't be half as appealling or half as popular. You might not like that, you might not like what that says about us as human beings, but it is something you need to accept. Sure, when EVERY game on the shelf is a gangster fantasy and a GTA clone, we have a problem, and if Warren wants to go and make Deus Ex 3 without any weapons or fighting whatsoever I'll absolutely applaud that and will be first in line to buy a copy. But just as my DVD collection has room for thoughtful, light-hearted Woody Allen movies, it also has room for bloodthirsty Sergio Leone westerns. It's the same with games.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 16:23

  • Dr_Actually #38 6 years ago

    "Also, I think Spector is way off on this. GTA3 was no great achievement in terms of design. It's just GTA1 in 3D. And GTA in turn was just Elite. The leap from GTA2 to GTA3 was a fantastic technical achievement, but not a notable design achievement. "

    Bollocks

  • fireclown #39 6 years ago

    'Violence is a part of the human condition, a part of all our lives, and violent roleplay can be both entertaining and culturally valuable. Many great, culturally significant books, movies, plays, paintings are extremely violent. In fact some are far more violent in their imagery than any of the cartoonish violence we see in our games). '

    Cartoon violence and endlessly glorified, gleeful thuggery are 'part of the human condition', but they're an ugly, unsophisticated part that doesn't benefit much from close examination. They're fun in the way that wanking is fun.

    Violent entertainment can be intelligent and interesting. But it doesn't have to be. In fact it's usually not.

    'When EVERY game on the shelf is a gangster fantasy and a GTA clone, we have a problem'

    There *are* no games of anything like the prominence of GTA with the intelligence of an (early) Allen film, which is your problem right there...

    '

  • fireclown #40 6 years ago

    alternatively try replacing the word 'violence' with the word 'defecation':

    'Why is the representation of defecation in videogames "debasement of culture" necessarily? Defecation is a part of the human condition, a part of all our lives, and rubbing shit into cartoon NPCs' hair can be both entertaining and culturally valuable...'

  • Xerx3s #41 6 years ago

    Finally. Someone of importance has the guts to say what kind of crap GTA3 really is.

    /hails warren.

    Disc - GTA3 is the singlemost overhyped game franchise in the history of crappy games. And DE was a great game, far better than gta3 will ever be. It gets very close to the lvl of ss2 in terms of gameplay.

    "disc, I think you missed Spector's point." - True -_-, but disc points out sequels.

  • MrAtheist #42 6 years ago

    I think there are two important questions raised by this...

    Did Spectors mum play Deus Ex and gun down those Illuminati bastards?
    Which ending did she choose?

  • ProfessorLesser #43 6 years ago

    LOL @ Atheist

    My take on this:

    Spector is merely saying what we all think - that Rockstar have gone too far. As someone touched on, he's not delivering a meticulously arranged argument that will stand up to 2 days' debate on an internet forum. Do that, and you can pick any monologue apart for whatever means you want, thanks to the beauty that is semantics.

    Instead, he's just chosen to say what he thinks, in a more or less spontaneous manner. It doesn't matter if you think he's being a hypocrite, because you're one of at the most only half of everyone total who disagrees with him. The other half agree. And seeing as our opinions on what he said aren't in any way relevant, it doesn't matter either way!

    I can't speak for Thief, but GTA vs DX is an unfair comparison. Take a step back and look at the subject matter first - in GTA, you play a criminal underling rising to the top of a less-than-intricate mafia death-web, whose only motive is to pull women, get money, and kill.

    In Deus Ex, you play a troubled, biologically enhanced Government agent, tasked with dissecting the lies from the truth about your origin and politics in general, in a continually evolving story where allies become enemies become allies again.

    In which game is death more justifiable? Don't kid yourselves and try and argue that.

  • Sko #44 6 years ago

    "...whose only motive..."

    ...and that, kids, is how we spell 'spin'.

  • Kiigan #45 6 years ago

    fireclown said:

    "Cartoon violence and endlessly glorified, gleeful thuggery are 'part of the human condition', but they're an ugly, unsophisticated part that doesn't benefit much from close examination. They're fun in the way that wanking is fun."

    Says you :) I appreciate that I have both you and Warren Spector looking out for us as moral arbiters of what is "culturally valuable" but I don't subscribe to the idea that violent roleplay / fantasy / representation needs to be sophisticated in order to be valuable. In fact, the point of violence is that it IS unsophisticated. That doesn't preclude the potential for treating a violent act with some maturity and intelligence for a change, but there's room for the puerile too. After all, gaming is pretty much exclusively a puerile and childish pursuit, being all about simplistic and cathartic acts of play. It's dumb, but enjoyable and valuable all the same.

    I'd welcome a smarter take on games, but I certainly wouldn't suggest that these dumb games aren't culturally valuable. I'm not going to get into the tedious argument about videogames as art, but I can think of some fantastic movies that would be considered "puerile" but are nonetheless volubly important to both cineastes and casual punters alike.

    "Violent entertainment can be intelligent and interesting. But it doesn't have to be. In fact it's usually not. "

    Half true. Games are rarely intelligent, but frequently interesting. Is there anyone posting on EG that thinks games are not of interest? If so, why bother?

    "There *are* no games of anything like the prominence of GTA with the intelligence of an (early) Allen film, which is your problem right there... "

    That isn't really my problem. I don't expect the same kind of intellectual stimulation from videogames that I get from books or (some) movies. I would welcome smarter games, and if Warren Spector thinks he can do something to help push things along I'll support it. However, his point that the violent content of games like GTA "debases the culture" is pure moralistic snobbery, and one could apply the same subjective arguments to a many wonderful movies and books with violent content.

  • Kiigan #46 6 years ago

    fireclown said:

    "alternatively try replacing the word 'violence' with the word 'defecation':

    'Why is the representation of defecation in videogames "debasement of culture" necessarily? Defecation is a part of the human condition, a part of all our lives, and rubbing shit into cartoon NPCs' hair can be both entertaining and culturally valuable...' "

    I'm not sure I'd agree that rubbing shit into cartoon NPCs hair would be entertaining or culturally valuable, but I'll keep an open mind on the subject. The first game to tackle scat fetishes in an interesting manner gets my 30 quid!

  • Kiigan #47 6 years ago

    lol @ MrAtheist

    These are the answers we need!

  • Kiigan #48 6 years ago

    Dr_Actually said:

    "Bollocks"

    Why is that, exactly?

  • ProfessorLesser #49 6 years ago

    You illustrate my point with beautiful irony, Sko. My phraseology has nothing to do with the point I was actually making.

  • Jonathan_Fakenham #50 6 years ago

    I don't see why you guys are trying to pin DX2 on Spector.. I mean, he was just a producer on that, and spoke publicly after the game was done, about some disagreements he had with how it turned out (ammo system, for one..) --

    I agree that every game since GTA3 has just been a style/content-update, mostly, but I don't pin them for that. I mean, the way there hasn't been a GTA4 yet seems to imply what Rockstar thinks about the matter..

    And you can't really hit down on the violence part.. It's just something we all have in us, like it or not. Subconciously, that's a part of why the GTA's are so fun.. Plus the fact that it's all inside a funny satire caricature world, of course.. I don't feel bad for beating up cartoon thugs..

    But still, there are flaws all over the games.. Flaws that can piss you off, and flaws that will make you all "why the f*** am i playing this, really..".. (I seem to remember thinking that whilst exploring the vast, mostly empty expanses of SA). But after getting over all that, with the first playthrough complete, and the game area explored and known, the final evaluation is -- these games are really fun overall, and there's nothing quite like them.. Which is why they survive..

  • fireclown #51 6 years ago

    'I appreciate that I have both you and Warren Spector looking out for us as moral arbiters of what is "culturally valuable"'

    My pleasure. You obviously need some guidance :)

    Spector isn't slamming 'violence' per se. He's slamming the very particular mix of unpleasant thuggishness, misogyny and gangster escapism that GTA keeps giving us. And he calls GTA a 'stunning accomplishment' in terms of game design. He's pointing out that there's something ugly about the way Rockstar put real brilliance and tremendous resources into a huge toybox that primarily rewards one particular kind of play: behaving like a violent, attention-deficient teenager, running over prostitutes and giggling.

    His mother, who you think is irrelevant. Imagine that you wanted to talk about films to someone who'd never seen one...and Kill Bill and Sin City were the cream of *all* film, not just of violent films. Or books, and American Psycho or Venus in Furs were the best and best-known out there.

    'I don't expect the same kind of intellectual stimulation from videogames that I get from books or (some) movies.'

    Then you probably don't want to use Leone and Allen as examples of how variety in films is analogous to variety in games.

    'his point that the violent content of games like GTA "debases the culture" is pure moralistic snobbery, '

    if he was making a point about violent content, maybe it would be snobbery, but it's a point about GTA's particular poisonously nasty, cynically controversial flavour.

    wrt 'debasing the culture': look at it this way. It's GTA's freeform gameplay and the immense resources (big maps, A-list voice talent, hours of radio, variety) that made it a winner. But they chose to wrap it up in this stupid yo-homie I'm-so-hard gangsta bullshit. As a result we're showered with pimp-your-ride imitations all similarly wrapped up in yo-homie I'm-so-hard gangsta bullshit. Way to go, guys.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 19:29

  • fireclown #52 6 years ago

    btw I think Spector's comment about 'debasing the culture' is a bit of a red herring: he doesn't mean (imo) culture in the fuzzy sense of valuable stuff that gets piped into people through books and museums and TV, he specifically means gaming culture.

  • Sko #53 6 years ago

    " You illustrate my point with beautiful irony, Sko. My phraseology has nothing to do with the point I was actually making."

    Phew, musta missed your point. It was...?
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 20:43

  • Sko #54 6 years ago

    "As a result we're showered with pimp-your-ride imitations all similarly wrapped up in yo-homie I'm-so-hard gangsta bullshit. Way to go, guys."

    If that was true shouldn't we be being showered with mobster imitations wrapped up in hey-capo I'm-so-hard gangster bullshit? Or are you trying to 'blame the bling' on a game that came out after the proliferation of that culture into mainstream gaming?

    Sure, GTA hitched up to that particular bandwagon but that was never going to be a huge leap. Still, if you're simply going to consider any kind of inclusion of that type of content beneath you then it really does all just come down to snobbery.

  • ProfessorLesser #55 6 years ago

    That instantaneous mode of speach has nothing to do with the message being conveyed.

    If he wanted to, he could've sat down and meticulously arranged a throughly underwhelming statement that would've expressed, dully, the core of his opinion, but which would ultimately me uncontestable.

    But that's not how normal human beings talk. My point is that anything, said by anyone, can be picked apart through semantics in order to wield an argument with someone on an internet forum, as has been done here by people dodging the really very obvious issue: that GTA is repetitive, uninspiring, rinse/repeat mass-market chart-fodder. It may also be very good, but the increasing apathy with which Rockstar seem to be approaching this franchise is surely evident to all?

    Nobody likes anyone or thing willing to rest on its laurels.

  • admir #56 6 years ago

    Warren shut up

  • Kami #57 6 years ago

    I won't take issue that GTA has made a very large impact on the gaming market - my issue is that it's the kind of game which is going no-where at 300km/h. There is so bloody little that can be done without detracting from it being "GTA" and without (a) going obscenely over-the-top or (b) looking like they're dumbing down. I liked the original GTA (top-down one thanks) but only because at the time I was at school and I knew I wasn't really supposed to be playing it.

    Videogames do involve violence - whether that be bopping things on the head with your body weight, or creating a hundred new ventilation shafts with a customised SMG. It's an inherent part - not just of videogames, but cartoons and entertainment in general today. So violence itself isn't the issue - that can be done both tastefully, and crudely.

    The message I got from this was "Same old same old" - which, IMO, is a valid point (though I do think he should have kept his mouth shut). Next GTA game - what will change exactly? And what of the next? GTA is a game really stuck in a rut of it's own making - as a game it was originally really well designed, but Rockstar have dug their own hole. There is little they can do to change the formula now... and given time, it will eventually disappear I feel.

    I guess the one thing I think is probably important is how to keep things fresh, how to keep things interesting. It's not just GTA though - Sonic, Mario, even Tomb Raider and lots of other games - they've committed this gaming crime too, recycling same old same old. The thing is, these games had good scope for reinvention. GTA is unique in the fact that even if the developers can't make any sweeping changes, then the fans won't like the changes and therefore you arrive at a creative cul-de-sac.

    Warren kinda does have a good argument there. I wouldn't "Hate" GTA2, VC and SA, to be honest I think it's the kick up the arse the industry probably needed. But I don't see a long-term future there either... so let's enjoy them. One day the fun will be over, the shine will fade and we'll move onto the next game...

    It's how the industry works.

  • Genji #58 6 years ago

    While I certainly admire GTA's open-ended gameplay, I curse it at the same time for being the focal point of all the bad press that my hobby gets. I know that this is probably a delibrate tactic by Rockstar to get more sales through controversy, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. There's much more to gaming than violence, sex and drugs, but try telling that to the people who read the media stories about GTA.

    Maybe I shouldn't care about what they think, but I do. I want games to get the sort of acceptance that movies got in the middle of the 20th century.

    And Warren Spector's mum almost certainly chose the "God" ending of Deus Ex, reflecting the God-like powers that she has over him ala Norman Bates' mum. She's controlling him now, as we speak.

  • admir #59 6 years ago

    i had a lot of fun playing gta3. it was new and great open ended gameplay.
    gta 4 and 5 had them but never finished them , i just didnt like them. what i dont like are those stupid fucking parents its because of them why the game sold well. we all know who raises their childern the TV, games and music and its not the parents, no dont blame them to have fucked up childern

  • ST.. #60 6 years ago

    Sorry Warren old boy but leaping over a skyscraper in a motorbike whilst firing a Uzi from the sidwindow with Guns N' Roses blaring on the radio is tremendous fun......games are meant to be fun? remember? That's all it is: fun. Society isn't being eroded here.

    You can't show it to your mother? big deal.......concentrate on your own backyard, Deus Ex 2 was one of the biggest anti-climaxes ever.

  • firefly #61 6 years ago

    The major difference between violence in film and violence in games is that a cinematic narrative often demonstrates that a life of violence often takes its toll on the wielder. Look at all the classical gangster films out there - despite their subject matter they strove to maintain a moral centre - the protagonist inevitably met his downfall and there were often messages at the beginning and the end of the film encouraging the audience to do what they can to stop crime rather than inviting them to imitate what they've seen. Even in the likes of The Godfather the long term message is that a life of crime ultimately does not pay. Similarly war films often maintain one central theme - the idea that war is bad and that death is the only true result.

    The problem with violence in video games is that it's difficult to emulate the same feeling. Violence isn't shown within a context of being something to abhor or as being disgusting or anything rather its something that is seen as the raison d'etre of many games. In Grand Theft Auto the only consequences that your actions have is that people may try to kill you, and even if they succeed all you really lose is your weapons and a little money. Every single person you see exists to be a target for you to possibly eliminate, their death is ultimately inconsequencial. I remember a few years ago EA advertised Medal of Honour with the tagline "You don't play, you enlist" at the time it crossed my mind how offensive this could be to those who actually fought in WWII. In reality you absolutely are playing. The people who fought in the war did not do so because they wanted to kill as many enemy soldiers as possible or because they thought it would be fun (well some might have done so initially but I'd imagine that didn't last too long), they did so because it needed to be done in the hopes of protecting what was dear to them. The idea of a war video game is an odd one because the experience is ultimately the antithesis of real war. You aren't stuck far from home in a situation you'd rather escape forced to unspeakable things in order to survive, you're sat at home repeatedly choosing to wield violence for its own sake aware that the worst fate that might await you is that you'll have to start the level over. Even in the likes of Metal Gear Solid where the general stupidity of war has been a fairly major theme from the outset it remains ironic that as a player you repeatedly choose to enter these situations and derive fun from a situation that all the characters would rather not be in.

    Ultimately I have to say that I agree with Spector's statements. Whilst I enjoy Grand Theft Auto I can see that the series does not necessarily present the freedom that it is often praised for. Why if you can do almost anything is progress only achieved through illegal acts? Even if one were to decide that they must make an honest living the game necessitates that you must, for example, steal a taxi in order to embark upon this living. Violent games will always be with us but game design as a product of our culture would be enriched by designers branching out into new directions and forming new ideas that are not centred around violent acts.

  • #62 6 years ago

    Hah. Nice sensationalist dumbass headlines, EG. Kneejerk idiots are reacting.. wow, completely unexpected, and they're such a great demographic aswell. Aim high!

  • Genji #63 6 years ago

    There's some nice points hidden in there, Firefly. Here's hoping more people will take the time to read them.

  • Jonathan_Fakenham #64 6 years ago

    "I am frustrated that the games in the GTA series, some of the finest combinations of pure game design and commercial appeal, offer a fictional package that makes them difficult to hold up as examples of what our medium is capable of achieving. The fictional context of GTA all but ensures that it will be portrayed in the mainstream press (and, I guess, in the courts!) as little more than a 'murder simulator' when it clearly is so much more--if you take the time to look."
    quote, Warren Spector - what he really meant..