Warren Specter on the Future of Video Games

S

steviep

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
4,985
I'm glad I'm not the only one tired to death of the current trends in games.

(source)
Video games are the next great form of artistic expression. Video games are going to blow past movies as the most mainstream kind of entertainment. Video games ... are doomed.

Whoa, what?

What happened to the games industry being the Hollywood of the next generation? Well, it's not going to happen if game makers and game players don't open their eyes to the pitfalls lurking ahead, says one of the most revered talents in the field of joystick jigglin'.

Warren Spector has been making games since the old-school era of Dungeons & Dragons, and has lent his talent to titles including the Wing Commander and Ultima series and classics like System Shock, Thief and Deus Ex.

But he says games are on the verge of following in the footsteps of another popular medium that was touted as the next great thing in artistic expression, then sank back into a sideline subculture: Comic books.


"The choices we make over the next couple of years are going to determine whether we succeed or fail," Spector said this week in an interview from the Montreal International Games Summit, where he delivered the opening keynote address.

"I can see us going the way of comic books and becoming a marginal medium that could have been a contender."

Of the many obstacles facing the industry, Spector said the biggest is that the next generation of consoles will be so advanced, the cost of making games that fully take advantage of the hardware will be beyond the reach of many small- and medium-sized developers.

"My 'big budget' used to be $2.5 million (US), then in the last round it was about $12 million," Spector said. "To be competitive in the future you'll need $20 million. That's crazy!"

Spector also blames gamers themselves for being too complacent. According to Entertainment Software Association of Canada statistics, the average age of a video game player in this country is 30. Yet maturing gamers are too willing to settle for the same old same old, Spector said.

"We're still doing urban thuggery and skateboarding and alien invasions," he said. "If we don't start broadening the range of content we offer, that aging of the audience, which is so positive and powerful for us, is going to end."

The trick in moving away from "adolescent power fantasies" is finding a way to do things like comedy or political satire or truly emotional drama in an interactive medium, Spector said.

"We need to let players explore a broader range of emotions than just adrenaline rush."
Click to expand...

I guess Nintendo isn't the only one that thinks the same about budgets and genres...

Edit: forgot to mention the neat graphic in the actual newspaper article from today's Toronto Sun. It was a funny little graphic that went like this:

November 2009
Dork Illustrated
Armageddon Issue
GAME OVER
Repent, geeks! The end is nigh
[insert picture of Dual-Shock controller... lol!]
How an entire industry failed you so miserably
PLUS: Halo VI - So Very Tired
 
I agree to an extent... But this is taking it way out of context. Video games will never go the way of the dodo (or comics for that matter). And there are games for anything you could even think of. True some of the most popular selling games of are the same things, like "Alien Invasions" and "Urban Thuggery", but that is what people want right now. I don't like the GTA series but a lot of people do. Just cuz something you want isn't being made, don't say the whole industy is imploding...
 
You don't think so? Read up on Hollywood. Then read up on videogames.
 
I understand what he's saying but I disagree to some extent. Games are an escape for this 30 year old. I want to do stuff in games I can't do in real life... you know, skateboard, run people over, travel into space, go to war, and kill people for fun to name a few things.

Games don't have to be interactive movies. All I want is a sandbox to play in, so-to-speak. Just give me something cool to do, a world to play in.... If I want a drama or comedy I'll watch a movie with my wife, or read a book.

Last thing, gamers, at least the hardcore gamers are not very complacent... I mean all you have to do is browse a game message board and you'll find a lot of people demanding more from developers. I personally would love to play the new Star Wars Battlefront but Pandemic hasn't gotten it right yet, so I will not be buying it.
 
Gamers not complacent? Look at all the people that bought Quake 4.
"cool, quake 2 with better graphics... awesome!"
 
I stopped caring about what waren specter had to say on this subject back when I played deus ex 2.
 
Sure the game wasn't all that great... but don't you think this guy has a point? I certainly do.
 
Harvey Smith was project director for DX2, Spector had nothing to do with it (in a few interviews he said openly he didn't agree with Smith's decisions but trusted him enough to make it work).
 
Warren Specter needs to get cracking on a new original game to invent a new genre of games :D
 
drewb99 said:
Harvey Smith was project director for DX2, Spector had nothing to do with it (in a few interviews he said openly he didn't agree with Smith's decisions but trusted him enough to make it work).
Click to expand...

To say he had nothing to do with it is wrong. He had a lot to do with the project, even though he wasn't leading it.
 
after bothering to read that dribble I think specter is an idiot that just got lucky...

I dont "settle for the same old same old", instead I play what I like and am not always impressed by the next big overhyped "break through". Simplicity has its place in all mediums, over done doesnt always equal well done.

The only really valid point he makes(is it even a point or just an observation?) is the cost of producing games but really its just a natural progression and nothing can or will change about that. Small studios will still make great games here and there on small budgets but the forces in the industry will spend massive amounts of cash and have greater MSS.

It seems to me that the industry isnt where HE would like it to be and he's just bitter about it. To put this guys name anywhere near that of miyamoto or suzuki(spelling?) is just silly :(
 
Would it help give this "little guy" any credence to hear Miyamoto say the exact same things? I'm sure I can find the many speeches that he has.
 
So, this guy is saying that the videogames industry is becoming one where creativity and originality are marginalized for the sake of profits. And this is different from Hollywood...how?
 
The point is, it's becoming one and the same as hollywood. It's not different.
 
steviep said:
Would it help give this "little guy" any credence to hear Miyamoto say the exact same things? I'm sure I can find the many speeches that he has.
Click to expand...

There is a difference. Miyamoto doesnt come off bitter, he goes about his ways doing what he wants and doesnt turn around and point fingers cause things dont match up to his vision. That whole "partly blames gamers" thing really rubbed me the wrong way :mad: like my taste in games is somehow holding him back...
 
sc4r4b said:
I understand what he's saying but I disagree to some extent. Games are an escape for this 30 year old. I want to do stuff in games I can't do in real life... you know, skateboard, run people over, travel into space, go to war, and kill people for fun to name a few things..
Click to expand...
I agree. I'm not complacent either.

I'd like to see a new space sim. Or at least bring the genre back. I don't want ultra realistic games based on politics and comedy. Like the person I quoted stated, I too just want a sand-box to play in and do things I can't do in real life.
 
Deadsexy said:
There is a difference. Miyamoto doesnt come off bitter, he goes about his ways doing what he wants and doesnt turn around and point fingers cause things dont match up to his vision. That whole "partly blames gamers" thing really rubbed me the wrong way :mad: like my taste in games is somehow holding him back...
Click to expand...

well, what is your taste is really the question there. Do you enjoy intelligent games and buy games that are innovative and push the industry forward or do you buy shit like Halo 2?
 
Deadsexy said:
after bothering to read that dribble I think specter is an idiot that just got lucky...

I dont "settle for the same old same old", instead I play what I like and am not always impressed by the next big overhyped "break through". Simplicity has its place in all mediums, over done doesnt always equal well done.

The only really valid point he makes(is it even a point or just an observation?) is the cost of producing games but really its just a natural progression and nothing can or will change about that. Small studios will still make great games here and there on small budgets but the forces in the industry will spend massive amounts of cash and have greater MSS.

It seems to me that the industry isnt where HE would like it to be and he's just bitter about it. To put this guys name anywhere near that of miyamoto or suzuki(spelling?) is just silly :(
Click to expand...

He progressed the industry a LOT in different arenas. There are a lot of parallels between the two designers and I think you are wrong: his point was that the industry is stagnating. Maybe you as a player don't care because you get your "adrenaline rush" but that's not the only thing gaming as a medium can convey and you "knowing what you like" is just lazy generalization of that medium.

Elaborating on some of the causes an industry would be stagnating is different from bitching.
 
I agree... though Miyamoto nor Specter are the same types of designers, they both share the opinion that the industry is well on its way to the path of stagnation, and the path that the main next gen consoles are taking are a dangerous, hollywood-like path that will end with the same result. They are both pushing for the same type of thing.
 
Fact #1: Spector is difficult to work with and can be a pain to co-workers.
Fact #2: Spector is well respected in the industry.
Fact #3: He's usually right.

For the most part he's right. Video gaming is about to come to a cross-roads. However, I feel that it's mostly the fault of the publishers (EA, Activision and Take-Two for the most part, MS and Nintendo to a lesser extent) to stick with endless rehashes of games and franchises rather than go with risker directions.

Hollywood has their summer blockbusters that are usually devoid of any thought. At least during November and December they trot out the Oscar-worthy flicks. Video games have been stuck in "blockbuster" mode for some time now with very few exceptions.
 
Torgo said:
Fact #1: Spector is difficult to work with and can be a pain to co-workers.
Fact #2: Spector is well respected in the industry.
Fact #3: He's usually right.

For the most part he's right. Video gaming is about to come to a cross-roads. However, I feel that it's mostly the fault of the publishers (EA, Activision and Take-Two for the most part, MS and Nintendo to a lesser extent) to stick with endless rehashes of games and franchises rather than go with risker directions.

Hollywood has their summer blockbusters that are usually devoid of any thought. At least during November and December they trot out the Oscar-worthy flicks. Video games have been stuck in "blockbuster" mode for some time now with very few exceptions.
Click to expand...

It's a vicious cycle though. Those of us who can distinguish between a worthy sequel and a rehash are, by and large, the minority.

If I were an executive at EA, I would keep shoveling the shit as well. They're in it to make money. Why take a risk with something new when the idiotic masses are still willing to buy millions of the same thing that they bought millions of eleven months ago?

We'll get an original gem every once in a while, but it's not going to be often. The Revolution will bring a new way to play games, but we'll still get a dozen Mario/Metroid/Zelda titles over the course of it's shelf life.
 
Yes, and we'll have to see if they put good use to those Mario/Zelda/Metroid titles, now won't we? It is likely the case that they will. (btw, a dozen? do you know how long it takes to make most of the big IPs?)

Though I agree with you, DS... if EA can continue to make games selling Madden year after year with minor updates and new rosters, why wouldn't they? If the idiots still buy, make money off it. I would. The problem is that the idiots keep buying. So yes, this "blockbuster" mode is most certainly partly the gamers' fault.
 
The investors of EA stock are starting to get worried. The news reports outside of the gaming journals are starting to take notice that EA gets the majority of their profits from new seasonal releases of their sporting titles. This really got noticed when the publishers started forking over obscene amounts of money on exclusive rights to the NFL and MLB. Investors get nervous when so much is spent and a return isn't guaranteed.

Frankly, EA was scared with Madden was successfully challenged by ESPN 2K4 last year. That's why they pulled the trigger on the NFL deal. If I were a EA exec, I would make sure that some of my mad Madden profit money was being diversified into other titles.
 
A good game is a good game is a good game, whether its "innovative" or groundbreaking. The industry is neither stagnant nor in any trouble. Just because one person is bored with a genre or series doesnt mean its stagnant. His assinine view is just the product of someone with far too much stock in his own opinion. I hate whiney artists that get mad when people dont appreciate things in the exact way that they want, you just make it and I'll decide if I like it thank you very much...
 
Deadsexy said:
A good game is a good game is a good game, whether its "innovative" or groundbreaking. The industry is neither stagnant nor in any trouble. Just because one person is bored with a genre or series doesnt mean its stagnant. His assinine view is just the product of someone with far too much stock in his own opinion. I hate whiney artists that get mad when people dont appreciate things in the exact way that they want, you just make it and I'll decide if I like it thank you very much...
Click to expand...

He wasn't whining, your ill informed opinion does not make rocks float.
 
Attean said:
He wasn't whining, your ill informed opinion does not make rocks float.
Click to expand...

Best. Burn. Today. :)

I agree with Deadsexy when he says a good game is a good game. Some people enjoy traditional fare - your Quakes, Dooms and Unreals. I enjoy them too. However, Spector is a clever fellow, and has made several games in my top five list.

I think his view should be respected and valued, but even more I wish he would get back in the kitchen and make me a goddamned Deus Ex sequel worthy of the name. :D
 
Deadsexy said:
A good game is a good game is a good game, whether its "innovative" or groundbreaking. The industry is neither stagnant nor in any trouble. Just because one person is bored with a genre or series doesnt mean its stagnant. His assinine view is just the product of someone with far too much stock in his own opinion. I hate whiney artists that get mad when people dont appreciate things in the exact way that they want, you just make it and I'll decide if I like it thank you very much...
Click to expand...
I don't think you got what he said.

What he's saying is the reality that games are becoming like hollywood. They pump the junk out because idiots buy it. If you buy the hype the game gets sold and they do what they've always done. Just with better graphics.

He has a good point. People need to expand and understand new horizons. Otherwise we'll be playing Quake 6 on our Pentium X. Except with better graphics. :rolleyes:
 
DukenukemX said:
I don't think you got what he said.

What he's saying is the reality that games are becoming like hollywood. They pump the junk out because idiots buy it. If you buy the hype the game gets sold and they do what they've always done. Just with better graphics.

He has a good point. People need to expand and understand new horizons. Otherwise we'll be playing Quake 6 on our Pentium X. Except with better graphics. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I was refering to the guy that said

"well, what is your taste is really the question there. Do you enjoy intelligent games and buy games that are innovative and push the industry forward or do you buy shit like Halo 2?"

but honestly if quake 6 is a good game I will play it on my pentium X. If quake 13 is a good game I'll play it. I dont play whats trendy or not play whats unpopular, I play what I like. Call it art all you want but fact is its an entertainment medium, if its entertaining it will be played by me. I dont get whats so alarming about the thought of playing quake 6, what if its *GASP* a good game?!?! Or because its the 6th in a series it cant be? I am confused. Perhaps I'm just not elitest enough to understand the problem :(

everyones vision of the future of gaming is the same, holodecks...
 
Deadsexy said:
I was refering to the guy that said

"well, what is your taste is really the question there. Do you enjoy intelligent games and buy games that are innovative and push the industry forward or do you buy shit like Halo 2?"

but honestly if quake 6 is a good game I will play it on my pentium X. If quake 13 is a good game I'll play it. I dont play whats trendy or not play whats unpopular, I play what I like. Call it art all you want but fact is its an entertainment medium, if its entertaining it will be played by me. I dont get whats so alarming about the thought of playing quake 6, what if its *GASP* a good game?!?! Or because its the 6th in a series it cant be? I am confused. Perhaps I'm just not elitest enough to understand the problem :(

everyones vision of the future of gaming is the same, holodecks...
Click to expand...

You're just not approaching gaming from the perspective of a designer like specter is. Gaming design is the merging of technical, artistic, and collaborative in order to create a ruleset and that could be a "holodeck" if you will, but it's more than that: it's working with constraints your given to bring something wholy original and new. If you're creating other peoples worlds and people are still buying it then the industry is stagnating and that is a problem that needs to be addressed on both the designers and consumers end.

To continue the discussion rather than just argue I do NOT think the blame lies with the publishers. As a designer, it's your job to innovate without letting your publisher know your doing it. As consumers, it's our job to reward designers for doing so and entertaining us with originallity, keeping us on our toes.

Deadsexy: Yes, quake 13 may be a good game if it's the exact same as quake 1 but why not just save your money and play quake 1? I mean really? Other than benchmarks what's the point? As a designer I'd shoot myself if it ever comes to rehashing the same ruleset over and over again because it "works", there's so much more ground to be made in gaming, why confine my pallette already.
 
I'd like to paste a link from Something Awful which pretty much speaks my opinion on sports games.

http://i.somethingawful.com/inserts/articlepics/photoshop/11-04-05-games/Archer.jpg

As for rehashing the same ideas over and over, it can be good and bad. If it's a good rehash that's fun to play, then people will pick it up in droves and the developer will have more money and stay afloat long enough to pump out their next game. At the same time it's bad because developers/marketing will just think "Well, who needs new ideas when idiots buy the same crap over and over again. Just up the graphics and call it a day."

Now, back to Shadow of The Colossus... I haven't been wanting to finish a game so bad since I picked this up.
 
Gaming is having something of a crisis of innovation at the moment. It is self sustaining, as developers become more conservative due to rising costs and gamers are still willing to make purchase decisions based on eye candy (I'm guilty of this as much as anyone). For an example of this, simply look at the number of games being made with numbers in their title. F.E.A.R is an exception to this, but doesn't necessarily deviate in any substantial way from established gameplay guidelines. There is nothing necessarily wrong with this.

Gaming is becoming ever more profitable and expensive. This means developers are unwilling to sacrifice large profit margins, and become risk averse. I suspect large companies like EA are still earning supernormal profits. Once the expansion slows, or gamers become sick of the same old, same old, companies will have to innovate.

In short, its just a phase. Chill. But I still want Deus Ex 2 (notice how I exempt Invisible War from that honorific).
 
The reason that it's scary is because it could become like hollywood.

Look at it like how hollywood does it. They know that people only watch a movie once. Hardly anyone actually goes to the theater and watches it again. Since they know this they basically make a crappy movie and hype the crap out.

Cat Woman looked good in the commercials but damn did it suck balls when you saw the actual movie. You'll never watch it again but even if it was good you'd probably wait for it on DVD or HBO. Hollywood gets their money and doesn't care.

Same thing can and does happen in video games. It's just not that bad. At least we can demo games and even play them before we buy them. At some point you know they'll create a Quake 5 and it will suck. Heck they could actually finish DukeNukem Forever and it could suck. You'll still go to the store and buy it. Just cause you remember how good the previous game was.

Don't think game companies aren't trying to get around this. Anyone notice the lack of demos or how some demos are released late? They know that you'll judge the game as good or bad if you download the demo. That's why some games don't even get a demo or the demo is released well after the game is on store shelves.

The real evil is when people preorder games. At that point it's like how things are done with hollywood. You'll only buy one copy. As soon as you buy it they made a sale. That point on they could care less. If you hype it enough people will preorder and buy something they've never even played. If the game sucked enough it'll get sold right back to EB or what ever game store you bought it from and eventually drop down to the price of $4.99.

Movies may suck but this doesn't have to happen to games. We can prevent this.
 
The gaming market has a few advantages:

Producing on older technology has a lower overhead when new tools and methods are applied. Heavily modified Quake# and Unreal# engines can still be found in development.

If things become too repetitive, write a script or make a tool.

The overwhelming majority of gamers are still in the first half of their lives.

In the next 10 years we may see a good voice synthesizer diverse enough to cover a wide range of voices and emotions. There is a possibility of dynamic-driven-emoting-digital-characters (based from fairly complex psychological profiles) simply reacting to the conditions set by the developers. Technology is weird that way.

IMO, from a story tellers perspective, gaming is still very much in it's pre-beta state. When the technology begins to plateau, the industry, at least in part will revolve around writers and directors.
 
DukenukemX said:
The reason that it's scary is because it could become like hollywood.

Look at it like how hollywood does it. They know that people only watch a movie once. Hardly anyone actually goes to the theater and watches it again. Since they know this they basically make a crappy movie and hype the crap out.

Cat Woman looked good in the commercials but damn did it suck balls when you saw the actual movie. You'll never watch it again but even if it was good you'd probably wait for it on DVD or HBO. Hollywood gets their money and doesn't care.

Same thing can and does happen in video games. It's just not that bad. At least we can demo games and even play them before we buy them. At some point you know they'll create a Quake 5 and it will suck. Heck they could actually finish DukeNukem Forever and it could suck. You'll still go to the store and buy it. Just cause you remember how good the previous game was.

Don't think game companies aren't trying to get around this. Anyone notice the lack of demos or how some demos are released late? They know that you'll judge the game as good or bad if you download the demo. That's why some games don't even get a demo or the demo is released well after the game is on store shelves.

The real evil is when people preorder games. At that point it's like how things are done with hollywood. You'll only buy one copy. As soon as you buy it they made a sale. That point on they could care less. If you hype it enough people will preorder and buy something they've never even played. If the game sucked enough it'll get sold right back to EB or what ever game store you bought it from and eventually drop down to the price of $4.99.

Movies may suck but this doesn't have to happen to games. We can prevent this.
Click to expand...

Really? Cat woman looked good to you in the commercials?
 
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Just another person who wants to have their article praised and discussed.
 
SnakeIRye said:
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Just another person who wants to have their article praised and discussed.
Click to expand...

When joining a discussion about something you feel this "passionately" against, it is best to discuss the reasoning for your quick dismissal of the topic. (if, for instance, you feel that this is the "dumbest thing you've ever heard" you could perhaps give us a reason why - it would add a lot more to the discussion than your ridiculous 2 sentence reply)
 
steviep said:
When joining a discussion about something you feel this "passionately" against, it is best to discuss the reasoning for your quick dismissal of the topic. (if, for instance, you feel that this is the "dumbest thing you've ever heard" you could perhaps give us a reason why - it would add a lot more to the discussion than your ridiculous 2 sentence reply)
Click to expand...

My reply was just as structured and informative as his article.

I know people will defend thier position even when holes are poked through it, but can you not see the rediculous comparison between graphic novels and games?

Two demensional story telling can only go so far, farther with three... but three dimensional interactive story telling has unlimited possibilities and with the medium in its infancy it's only naive to claim it's going to fall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top