Warren Spector slams GTA Comments by Ellie Gibson

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.

And that's coming from Warren Spector.

The designer of such successes as Deus Ex 2 and Thief 3 that REALLY built upon its predecessor.

Shut that piehole.

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

Completely agreed. Innovation is the key to success.......so our marketing people keep telling us.

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".

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

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.

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

But he's doing the same things and he doesnt even seem aware of it.

Here's a gun, here are some cybernetic implants to allow you to kill people more easily.

If it had been the designer of Animal Crossing, Katamari Damacy, Nintendogs or anything else that doesnt involve killing in any way then fair enough.

disc, I think you missed Spector's point.

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.

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.

@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.

But Thief 1 and 2 wasnt his doing.

"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."

And Deus Ex does that?

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

Yeah, Jack has a friend now.

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.

Thief: The Dark Project
Thief II: The Metal Age

That's the complete credits list and he does get a thanks in Thief.

" 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.

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.

"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.

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.

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)

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.

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.

"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.

@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).

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 ^_^

"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

The thing is that he's done the exact same things himself so why is he complaining?

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

Who really gives a shit what he thinks?

GTA is fun. End of story.

He's not marketed his games as uberviolent supergreat games no. But he uses violence to a great degree in his games.

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.

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

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.

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

'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.

"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

"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!

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.

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.

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.

"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

I think it's a common problem amongst the famous designers, they dont realize that what they say will be spread all over the internet.

You'll have David Jaffe ranting about game journalists not being part of the industry and then in the next paragraph saying how they do contribute and if its taken out of context people might think he is attacking these guys.

Or like the Katamari designer who is concerned with the insane appetite for games with certain people in Japan and then saying most games arent fun.

Or the insane Team Ninja Producer who says all other games suck.



A lot of developers who dont have the press listening do not agree with these guys.

'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...

'

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...'

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.

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?