“Our Spider-Man games have sucked”

by Dan on January 21, 2010

One of my pet peeves as a reviewer was seeing something I said taken out of context. People would often break off a shard of my main point and try to stab me with it. Drove me nuts.

No doubt you’ve caught the spicy headline quote from Bobby Kotick on several news outlets. It comes from an interview in this month’s issue of Game Informer. Strong words for sure. But I think they’re even stronger if you read them in the original context, because it means something completely different when you do.

GI has not posted the full interview online, because they quite understandably want you to pick up the issue for yourself to read the thing yourself. That’s fine, and you should. But here’s exactly what was run in the magazine before and after that soundbite:

On learning from Blizzard about having a commitment to quality:

I’ll tell you, the thing that was an interesting experience for me was three years ago going through the management presentations with Blizzard. We’d do our presentation, they’d do their presentations. We have a lot of properties, so we had people that were coming in and saying, on a kid’s game for example, “Well, we’re talking a 75- or 80-rated game and it’s going to be X, Y, and Z.” Mike Morhaime, Paul Sams, and Rob Pardo were like “Why would you ever target an 80-rated game?” The producers said, “Well it’s a kid’s game, you don’t get the best ratings on a kid’s game because reviewers aren’t going to review them as favorably, so if you look at them objectively an 80 is actually a good rating for a kid’s game or movie game.” That was the other one — movie games were supposed to be an 80.

I remember walking out of the meeting saying, “Why would we make an 80-rated game?” [Laughs] Even adjusting for genre. Our guys would tell you, “Well, it’s the adjustment for a Metacritic rating that they are automatically going to be a lower rating.” But I was thinking that when we did the great Spider-Man PlayStation game, we got a 95 rating. You can make a great game. Our Spider-Man games have sucked for the last five years. They are bad games. They were poorly rated because they were bad games. We went away from what is Spider-Man. It’s about web-slinging. If you don’t do web-slinging right, what is the fantasy of Spider-Man? But I think that was one of those wake-up calls. Even if you’ve been doing this a long time, you walk out saying “That’s a good question.” [Laughs]

Okay, so, the quote is undeniably, irresistibly juicy — I understand the power of a sexy headline (I’m using it myself). But is that the real story from this interview? To me, it’s Bobby Kotick saying, fairly bluntly, “we’re learning from Blizzard’s success, and we can be doing a better job, so let’s raise the bar.” Higher standards, better games — isn’t that exactly what gamers want?

Right before the publicly reported quote, he talks about raising the quality expectations internally; right after the quote, he calls it a “wake-up call” and notes the changed perspective. To me, that’s the story.

  • http://twitter.com/JalenJade JalenJade

    Out of context quotes are what stops me from reading interviews taken from other sources without reading it directly from the original source. Theres too much manipulation and agenda working in the media (I'm including blogs as media) today.

  • Thefremen

    What is left unsaid is that from Blizz they are learning that quality counts, what they are learning from Activision is that you can make games with very little content and roll out sequel after sequel every year to make more $$. (Starcraft 3)

  • oneofswords

    I'm not sure I follow you. Starcraft II a) isn't out yet and b) has been cooking for a long long time. They have been in no rush to get that out until it's done. I really don't think Blizzard has become a “year after year sequel” company since joining Activision. Do you have another example?

  • Fatboughl

    I'm just excited because I hope this means better Spider-Man games. :)

  • http://twitter.com/UbiGabe Gabriel Graziani

    You know, we had a similar problem with a quote made by Patrice about AC2. He said:

    “I felt that, 'Okay, there were too many things to do and to finish.' So we said, 'Ok, let's take a portion of the game that was planned and we'll give it in DLC.' We'll remove some stress to the team while giving more to fans and people who like Assassin's Creed.”

    So a few news outlets took that as an opportunity to push a big provocative headline claiming that we deliberately cut something out of the game in order to make more money. Of course, that decision was not made simply to cash in on DLC (as it is pretty clearly stated in the quote itself), and as a former journalist, I would like to think I wouldn't have run a story on that… then again, the temptation of a juicy headline can be too much to resist when you're in dire need of those precious unique impressions. That fact, however, doesn't make it right.

    It's really too bad that, when presenting information like this totally transparently, this is the kind of coverage you end up getting out of it.

  • mikepmcc

    I saw this exact story on N4G, and thought about what you said on tdar about people takign Kotick's quotes out of context, so I didn't give it much thought.

    Also, I know it must be hugely frustrating to have one's words twisted around, but I often find it much easier to just not worry about what the internet says as a mass, there are simply too many ignorant opinions out there to get riled up about individual ones. So, just take it easy, and keep putting your message out there, it really makes a difference.

  • http://twitter.com/Wjlaboy Wilson Laboy

    It's not like it matters. The Spider-Man games do suck with the exception of a few such as Web of Shadows. Just sayin'. Haha.

    Also, I'll just take this opportunity to congratulate you Dan on the new job. You're one of my role models when it comes to game journalism. Thanks for everything and I can't wait to be interviewed by you when I become a successful game developer. :D

  • http://twitter.com/JalenJade JalenJade

    If I had to guess i think theFremen is referring to “Starcraft II” being split up into 3 separate SKUs, taking the quality of a Blizzard game and applying the “Activision model” (meaning the model of push out multiple titles as quickly as possible.) To make more money on the title.

    Along those lines though, the decision to split “Starcraft II” up into multiple titles is what lead to my decision to not buy the game at all. Granted I was screwed over when trying to cancel my “World of Warcraft” account so I already had bitter feelings towards Blizzard.

    Maybe there's a good article/interview subject for you, why the split of the title and what lead to the decision more than just “there's too much content” that we've already heard over and over.

  • CaptainSlender

    I opened the post from Joystiq ready to let Bobby have it and defend my baby, Spiderman 2. After readying the full interview, I felt cheated, robbed of my chance for some other reason to hate Bobby. A shame, really. I'm much more satisfied with a pun-based headline.

  • http://www.gryzdezignz.com/ Gryz

    That's the complaint in any spectrum of the media (political or otherwise) “my quote was out of context”. However (as is, in my opinion, in this case) they are usually accurate and relevant regardless of the context they are in.

    When I read “our spiderman games have sucked” I think “Yeah so this means you've taken your first step to correcting a problem, admitting you have it”. That doesn't mean I believe the problem is remedied or even will be.

    Reading the rest of the interview didn't change that. The rest of the context didn't matter because the main point was “our spiderman games have sucked”. So ultimately in or out of context the reader can develop the same conclusion: Activision at least admits there has been a problem with this franchise. Anyone can say they are going to do better (I hear it from poor performing employees all the time “I've learned from my last 5 mistakes but the next time will be better, promise!!!”) but with a 5 year rate of failure isn't that truly whats accurate to the story?

  • oneofswords

    Ah, maybe that's it — that was announced back at Blizzcon, wasn't it? Well, I suspect that if it works, it works, and if it doesn't, they'll think about another approach next time. I haven't played anything on that yet (remember, I don't work in the Blizzard offices) so I can't really tell you whether it's justifiable or not.

  • Capt. Obvious

    I'm pretty sure he still said the games sucked. This was not taken out of context.

  • http://www.cheapcheapgeek.com/ Karl

    That article went a long way to making Bobby Kotick palatable to gamers. In that last couple of years he's come off as money obsessed and not caring about games. Whether it was true or a PR spin remains to be seen.

  • http://twitter.com/FB_TWTR Tom Williams

    Anything can be taken out of context to be made to seem like your saying something different for example, “This could be the game of the year but
    unfortunately framerate drops and graphical glitches badly let this game down” can be turned into “This could be the game of the year” Fot example lets take a small quote from your comment and turn into a quick headline…

    Gryz believes Kotek started on correcting spiderman

    Gryz recently commented on OneOfSwords.com, run by Dan Amrich saying 'When I read 'our spiderman games have sucked' I think 'Yeah so this means you've taken your first step to correcting a problem, admitting you have it'” blah blah blah etc.

  • http://www.gryzdezignz.com/ Gryz

    Unfortunatly you're still proving my point. “This could be game of the year”, while a ficticious statement I understand you are making up on the spot, would be referencing a game coming out in the future. If it was a game that was already out the statement would have then changed to “This could HAVE been game of the year” and while both are taken out of context and could both end with “unfortunatly framerate drops and graphical glitches badly let this game down”, the statement taken out of context still is true. It could be if those issues are fixed before launch and it could HAVE been were the issues fixed.

    Your second example is creating a headline out of a statement and isn't an example of taking something out of context, but even what you are (by removing a single paragraph out of my comment) is still a true statement it doesn't change what I'm saying or my overall stance.

    My point is this taking something out of context upsets people not because that is a falsified information but simply because they don't feel like the point THEY were trying to make was received. That's a human condition however where your perception is your reality and what you say could be heard or discerned totally different by the listener.

  • charliegavin

    Please tell me this isn't going to be the positively-spin-Bobby's-quotes site.

    Well, that's not fair. I don't think it will be.

  • oneofswords

    Not the plan. But I think I will wind up playing devil's advocate — I did that on all my other outlets and projects. If the world says A, I tend to say “Well, have you considered B?”

    And then the world EXPLODES.

  • Senor Hurt

    Your right Dan. His attitude about setting the bar higher is what gamers want not for him to say our past games have sucked. That isn't going to make be feel better about dropping $60 for Spiderman: Web of Shadows, not that I did. But maybe I'll feel better about buying the next game if the goal in developing it is to give me as “fun” as you can cram in a disc rather than shoot for a mediocre metacritic score just to keep your job as a game producer.

  • http://twitter.com/FB_TWTR Tom Williams

    I can see where you're coming from I did structure the sentance incorrectly however it is still possible to structure it so that it can be misconstrued, the reviewer of a game can talk about the idea behind the game being worth game of the year but the gameplay and graphics ruining it, however in an ad, PR can just take the gameplay bit the reviewer didn't say it was game of the year but it can be spun so it looked like he did.

    Secondly anyone reading my headline and not your actual comment could misunderstand your overall stance believing that you think Kotek will fix the spiderman series.

    Finally the audience to which any statement must be remembered, ignore that and any quote is immediately taken out of context. People phrase things differently for different audiences, what can seem outrageous to one person could seem fine to another. It's the same with irony and sarcasm, ignore that and a quote is completely different!

Previous post:

Next post: