Forget about what you think about game development during the GTA 6 leaks

Forget about what you think about game development during the GTA 6 leaks

The second thought upon seeing the GTA 6 leak was bleak. It was a recall to the protocols that had occurred when leaks or security breaches, no matter how small, had occurred, especially when I was on the development side of the business. The third thought was what Rockstar, the king of image control and information flow, would do now. It was also clear that an embattled CIA station chief required the agency to get everybody up. This is the group of assassins, each with cool names and

Matt Damon isn''t involved in the investigation, and the Rockstars have not dispatched Clive Owen to conduct a gun-point philosophical discussion with the culprit, as it may be. Either way, the response will be swift and all-encompassing, as well as what happened with the Half-Life 2 leak. (And we all know what happened there.)

The consequences of such a response are evident. There are security concerns about source code and other exposures which could potentially derail an entire project. Seconds after the leak, the internet was awash with people who feared how it looked. That it would be a big disgrace, and if this was what it looked like, what would it be?

These were some of the more lucid takes: at least the words were made sense in order. Others seemed to be knocked out into the universe with no concern for sense or sanity as they were. So, what is that reality, then? Generally, if you could see what all your favourite games looked like three months before you would insist on some kind of arcane magic performed.

I know this because since 2007, I have worked directly on high-profile or large-profile games as a writer. Some of my current roles include Battlefield, Harry Potter, Burnout, Half-Life, Total War, and others. One thing remains the same: making games is difficult, and it either all comes together right at the end, or it does not. The difference between success and failure, particularly for the so-called triple-A, is vanishingly small.

The guns were no longer available until two months before the release of the weapons, as a result of the fact that players would have to stick a tiny bit of blu-tac in the middle of the screen to aim the weapon. This was a game that had been around for years, I should add.

On one famously ambitious and fully overscoped open-world racing game that people are eager for a sequel to (and I will never play ever again) even getting it to run only a few months ahead of its E3 playable demo, which at the time erupted many, many problems. Particularly on PS3, which at that point was like trying to program advanced graphics onto a kazoo. When, eventually, a teammate and I broke the E3 demo, which caused the whole PS3 to become

I was given a battlefield promotion after my first day of making a turn-based strategy game (people were on it 24 hours a day trying to set the release date) and my boss said he had been promoted. I walked away and did not pay attention.

The reason: the much-vaunted naval battles, the key selling point, simply did not work. Every morning, at the end of the said shift, I would have to write the handover reports (to the incoming test teams as well as development and production teams), telling them as diplomatically as I could that, yes, we regret to inform you it is still Totally Fucked.

Which game you''ve ever played or heard of, guess what? Each of the games came out and, to a greater or lesser degree, exhibited little resemblance to what they appeared before. (Some games, particularly yearly sports titles, can vary dramatically even between review stage and release.) Some of them scored fantasticly, but most of them youve played or heard of, and at least one of them caused a real flaw on review day. One August an important magazine had given the game an 8., and

This sort of emotional response was not necessarily out of the blue, as it is the other part of the GTA 6 leak (or in fact, any game) that can have profound and unseen consequences: these things are not made by robots, they are made by an army of people who are whose motivations for it to operate well are varied, but they also realize that their dedication and sacrifices are generally not.

It is exhausting to spend years of your life figuring out these things, particularly when it doesnt appear to the outside world (or even some bean-counter in the production office) as a result of any improvement.

I imagine that 90 videos or so out there are potentially spoiling especially when people who know nothing about it are giving it the boot. (An example of how online opinion can change in literally seconds: the most secret E3 trailer for a game I was attached to went live at the show with no leaks. It had a long intro, and people in chat were literally saying what the fuck is this lol. When it was revealed, the area melted down. It''s that fine a line.)

There has been a lot of pushback on social media, with many devs of games, both large and small, showing off just how Metacritic darlings appeared in dev. However, what I saw, in my own opinion, looked really, really good for where it appears to be in the dev cycle.

Imagine what the future of the game will look once it arrives in 2148.

Related Articles