E3: Yay, snow, flake, blow, rails, nose candy, toot, white, co-co puff, powder, fluff, sniff…
by Vladimir Cole 
{ May 19th 2005 at 5:41PM }
Bill Spieth, Creative Director for Frog City Software (a subsidiary of Take-Two Interactive), gave us a little taste of Snow, a game in which players move up from small-time pot smuggling to major cocaine overlord.
Spieth's bosses told him that they wanted "edgy" so Snow was born. In it, players become Johnny Morrell, a washed-up actor who's decided to make his money the old fashioned way: illegally. Players start by smuggling in small quantities of loco weed from Mexico and selling it in Los Angeles.
Your goal is to grow your operations and take over the major drug running corridors that lead to the big markets of Miami, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York. You do this by hiring a variety of smugglers, crooked accountants (to launder your money) and arms dealers (to fortify your territories).
Replace cocaine with corn and Snow would still work as a game because it's basically a business simulation and strategy game at heart. But the illicit nature of the product is buttressed by stylishly rendered, cell-shaded cut-scenes with racy dialog and lots of sexual tension. Think Traffic with a happy ending.
The game is only 30% complete right now, so we didn't get a chance to experience all of the different game play elements, but it's certainly got us interested in seeing more of it. One big disappointment right now: no multiplayer mode. Spieth told us that they could focus on building a great story or on building a solid multiplayer game. They've had to focus their efforts on the story.
The game is expected some time next year for the PC and Xbox platforms.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
David @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Cool!
GamerHeaven @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Don't get me wrong, I've got a fair deal of "life" experience (and by 'fair' I mean 'great'), and indeed I enjoyed playing around with Howard Mark's little online dealing game - for anyone old and similarly experienced enough to know what I even talking about.
But this is really bad.
This harms the industry, and I'm not saying this as some pointy nosed posh bitch, I'm saying this as a mature bloke who's seen plenty, done plenty and knows how the world works.
This is just immature, guised as mature. Thanks Frog City Software for giving these bloody Mothers Against Video Game Violence (or whatever)idiots some very good ammo.
This is very sad news indeed, and it will not be getting my money that is for sure.
I'm gutted by this one, which is rare from E3 news - it's a sad day for gaming.
zander106 @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Nitpicker note: The movie 21 Grams isn't about the drug trade. It's a disjointed story about the lives of three people, but it actually has nothing to do with drugs. The idea is that 21 grams is supposed to be the weight of your soul when it leaves your body.
Maybe Blow or Traffic would have been a better analogy.
Vladimir Cole @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
It was Traffic that I was thinking of. Benny the Bull was in both, hence my confusion. Thanks for setting me straight.
Vladimir Cole @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
GamerHeaven: would it be similarly bad news if a movie studio had released a movie that glorified drug trafficing? Why should the game industry take heat for mature topics if the movie industry can release pretty much whatever it likes (except for some extremely taboo subjects).
Adam @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Gamerheaven is absolutely right folks. I am an advocate of keeping politics out of games - but something like this has no justification whatsoever and politics will not be far behind this one. With this and the JFK assassination game/GTA.. we seem to be on a ride down the slippery slope already. No, I am not a religious advocate. I do, however, advocate common sense.
We all had to expect it - where were we going to draw the line? GTA certainly pushed it. But what if Rock Star Games were to release a PS3 version of GTA with 100% photorealistic murder, complete with simulated screaming, suffering, etc.? Nobody in their right mind would want such a product representing our society, and for a person to play the game would be considered mentally questionable. The fact that graphics in games still for the most part represent "cartoons" has kept the issue from really coming to a head - but that convenience is quickly coming to an end.
The human race! We rock! ROFL!
Vladimir Cole @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Adam: what about movies that "realistically" depict murder? Most of us have never seen a murder. We only "know" what one looks like thanks to television and the movies. Why would a game that depicts movies with the same visual fidelity be any worse than a movie or TV show?
GamerHeaven @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Vladimir Cole - a very good point.
The problem is with the target audience.
Scarface is a great movie (a personal favourite), but if you were a fourteen year old kid trying to get in to the cinema to see it they would laugh and let the adults (the adult audience) buy tickets.
The game industry has an open door policy. The children of today don't care about certification, it doesn't apply to them.
The children of today can view adult content, and can buy it without consent - in terms of gaming.
How many kids these days play GTA. This is just another example. They can actually buy these games due to irresponsible selling, for some reason.
In my view (which may or may not be correct) these development houses actually target under age gamers. These games certainly don't appeal to me, a man who has "lived" similar experiences. These games seem to target the children wanting to be "mature".
Just look at the amount of people who love GTA but are not 18 - this is a severe problem in gaming and one that gives ammo to the stupid organisations liker MAVAV (or whatever, sorry for the persistent innacuracy in that field).
Sorry but I view these games as actually bad and I think they give these pointy nosed idiots a very good reason to degrade our fine industry.
Heck, just so you know I love GTA III, it's a great game, one I've enjoyed a great deal of hours on.
Vladimir Cole @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
GamerHeaven: so if the sales of these titles were restricted as well as sales of tickets to R-rated movies are restricted, would this be an OK game then?
Also, what is the movie industry doing to make sure that children don't watch mommy and daddy's copy of Debbie Does Dallas? What should be done to protect children from copies of games and movies that careless parents leave lying around?
t-bone @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
what a great way to learn a new trade!
Adam @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Vladamir - if you want to get down to it I don't like to see violence in movies at all. Obviously there are varying degrees of which I can personally handle and I'm perfectly capable of making that decision on my own. Outright "murder" played out on screen in gory detail is unbearable to me. But even if I do watch it, I'm not "an active participant" in the scene. Like most normal people I usually cringe, make a UGGGH sound, and wait for the scene to be over. IMO someone who watches such scenes with glee is either in denial about what violence truly exists in the world or they are mentally ill.
Interactive entertainment is a completely different animal from watching a movie. Taking that controller in your hands and proceeding to tear apart some backalley dealer with a chainsaw (GTA 3) takes a decision on your part. And as the active protagonist of such a scene, does one cringe and wait for it to be over? Of course not, it wouldn't make any sense - because they are the one doing the killing. Why do you (or anybody) like to play these scenes? Is it the power trip that comes from pretending you have control over the fate of these "fake" people's lives (honestly I know that is part of the appeal for me)? If so, don't you have to at least pretend *just a little bit* that what is happening on screen is real? That kind of suspension of disbelief, even if only in a "play world", is what makes using violence in real life easier and easier every time you play.
Look, I've played more Counter Strike than anyone, and I've shot up my fair share of computer characters. I've always argued that I play CS from a strategic perspective, and think nothing of the fact that I've just "killed an animated character", especially after the 10,000th one. I'm just trying to fast forward to a time when graphics are so realistic one can no longer easily separate, at least from a graphical perspective, reality from fantasy. And I'm starting to regret my previous stance on the issue.
GamerHeaven @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
"so if the sales of these titles were restricted as well as sales of tickets to R-rated movies are restricted, would this be an OK game then?"
It would be better, yes.
The problem is, as I know it to be true, that these games aren't really focused toward us "adults".
They actually target the teenage "children" as a core market, the ones wanting to be "mature", they know this as well as I do.
Maybe I'm too "mature" for this to appeal to me, but this seems like childsplay, hence why the "children" buy/want it in the bucket load. I can tell you for a fact, there are more illegal GTA fans than there are legal ones.
"Also, what is the movie industry doing to make sure that children don't watch mommy and daddy's copy of Debbie Does Dallas? What should be done to protect children from copies of games and movies that careless parents leave lying around?"
These children can't get into the Cinema to watch entertainment that isn't directed to them.
Likewise they can't buy movies that aren't targeting them.
The problem is people view games as "youngster" entertainment. It's a huge problem, game stores actually ignore certification, and even if they uphold it adults don't think it's bad to buy a computer game for their kid.
Kids from 12 upwards play GTA etc, they can actually go into a store and buy games easily that do not apply to their age - and again can easily get an adult to buy it for them. It's not like alcohol, they think kids are supposed to have the medium.
I know for a fact that many stores sell Adult rated games to children.
F**k, now I sound like one of these MAVAV idiots. But this is a real problem, and a game based around dealing Charlie that will be played by more kids than adults is a huge problem.
Heck. I've had a good drink tonight so this may not make that much sense. Basically these "mature" games are generally focused toward children wanting to to be "mature" - I bet the majority of the userbase is illegal. That is the probelem I have. And the second any of these kids does something wrong the parents will see the illegal game they bought for their kid and blame it - and not their lacking skills.
I still think these games don't help us or our market.
Again, I'm a bit drunk making this post - it might seem like S**t when I read it again tomorow - if so, sorry about that. I just hope you can see my points.
Barry @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Videogames are about fantasy. People have lewd, violent, sexual fantasies. Many of these fantasies they would never want to act out in real life, and so they play lewd, violent, sexually driven videogames.
This argument will continue forever, and there will always be some form of entertainment that comes along that is "just too realistic" for some people's sensibilities. In the end, though, until shooting someone in a game has a direct correspondence to someone dying in real life, it's still just a fantasy.
Verity @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Mothers Against Video Game Violence = was a hoax.
I don't know if it has formed into a real group since then, but MAVGV was a "project" by some college student.
Anyway, I don't see why this game shouldn't be developed and produced. I mean, I've played countless FPS games where I played the role of a soldier on the front lines, yet I have no inclination to join the Marines (However I have the utmost respect for anyone involved in the protection of our country).
Just because I can be a successful drug lord in a video-game does not mean I can drive down to the USA/Mexico border and become a successful drug smuggler. People who make that kind of correlation between fantasy and real life shouldnt be playing videogames to begin with. But you just cant ban the mentally unstable from playing videogames, so why limit the possible fun the majority of the gaming population can have?
Parents and the children need to take more responsibility for their actions. I mean, its not like Frog City Software is going to include a start-up kit including contact #s, ways to smuggle drugs across the border, etc. along with the game.
Geez! @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
You've missed my point a little here, and damn I regret sounding like these bloody conservatives.
My point is not that it will make kids want to do these things, more that it'll give ammo to to the media when kids already into these things get caught and also have the game.
There is countless cases now of parents blaming the games and not their own abilitys as a parent - and this will give plenty more ammo.
For years now the games industry has struggled to be accepted (by media) as an art form, and games like these don't help.
I can assure you when this game hits the market, and some punk gets caught dealing, he'll blame the game, get away with his actions and bring the industry into more disrepute.
Why could Frog Software not make a more civilised game, one that would sell on its own merits? They know fine well that the child market will go ape over this and it'll sell like hot cakes.
"Dude you get to sell drugs and kill people".
Heck the gameplay can fundemantally be crap and it'll still sell to the underage market (Driv3r anyone).
I agree that parents should take more responsability to what content their children use, but sadly they don't and sadly they will be all over this title when their wayward child gets into trouble. This gives them easy ammo for blaming something else and not their own shortcomings.
I just don't like this sort of announcement, it certainly doesn't seem cool to me (anymore, maybe when I was a teenager), though it's true that these debates will go on forever, as will the disrepute of the industry and struggle for it to be accepted as the artform that it clearly is.
otakucode @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
If you see a kid playing this game, and you exclaim "I can't believe little Johnny is sitting in his parents living room dealing cocaine and hiring thugs!" then you have a problem distinguishing fiction from reality. It's OK, a lot of parents have this problem nowadays too. What little Johnny is actually doing is pushing some buttons and watching a simulated character react to it. The kid understands this. The kid understands that in a game he can ride a dirtbike and jump 10 stories but in real life he wouldn't know how to shift the gears right. The parents, for some reason, think these games are teaching skills by example. Well, unless you can find me a drug deal you can operate with two analog sticks and a handful of buttons, I'm going to go ahead and say that's crap.
David @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
I'm tired of the debate of what "should" or "should not" be permitted. You don't want to buy the game? Don't. You don't want your kids to have it? Be a parent and pay attention. It's a game. It's a game for adults. This is still a free country. Fucking Commies.
GamerHeaven @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
By the way, post #15 was actually me, GamerHeaven - Geez must have been using my PC and account again.
# 16 & 17.
I actually agree.
The problem I see is that parents don't view this material as bad, I have a mate in retail who every day has to turn children away foum buying 18 rated games. Then he actually watches the kid get his parent, the parent walks into the shop buys the game and gives it to the kid right in from of him.
There is nothing he can do about that, it's fully legal.
The problem is these same parents are the first to lead an attack on gaming when the little kid scores a gram and gets caught. They are too stupid to blame themselves and this is an easy scapegoat.
I dunno, I enjoy gaming, but I hate seeing the direpute games like this bring, just as much as I hate these little punks who blame a game and get lesser charges when they shouldn't be playing that game in the first place.
To be honest it's not the actual game that is the problem, more the attitude of the market. All the same the developers know more kids will play this than the alleged target audience.
Sadly it's an unsolvable problem.
David @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
Well, I guess I don't see games or movies much differently than I see books. I suppose the primary difference is that, if you're reading a book, you're probably intelligent enough to know right from wrong. At the same time, if kids AREN'T reading books, then, once again, it's the parents' fault. Ultimately, there is little separating game-bannings and book-burnings. I'm vehemently opposed to both.
ChillyWilly @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
"My point is not that it will make kids want to do these things, more that it'll give ammo to to the media when kids already into these things get caught and also have the game."
Geez and GamerHeaven (same person?)... I understand your rant, but if the right wing and nutzo freaks that are always looking for something bad, they'll find it... and they don't need something like this game as ammo to hate the industry and poke holes in it... they already do that with tamer developers. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they b!tched about a Disney game with Pinnochio, asking for the size of his nose to be reduced for fear of..... you get the idea.
It would be sad if all developers avoided anything controversial or possibly negative based on the pre-determined fear or hate from conservative parents who, for the most part, are just trying to avoid talking to their kids in the process of raising them.
I say kudos to this developer. I mean, for years we've had Dope Wars. The major difference is that this has better graphics.
Mizfucking Niznyar @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
if someone did that on my coffee table id be like: why the fuck didnt you keep it in the fucking bag?
Vance @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
I suspect every one of you in here is ideologically on the same side. You just have different standards of what is acceptable and what is not. The day will soon come when games allow you to do anything, and will simulate it realistically. Want to rape some little school girls? No problem. Want to chop them up into pieces afterwards? It's going to happen--the signs are already appearing in some underground games in Japan. If you think this kind of content is acceptable, then you are a sick bastard who should be shot.
Face it, guys: we all know that games should have limits as to how far they go. We just draw the line in different places. Personally, I draw the line at glorifying an illegal and destructive segment of our society like the drug trade.
GamerHeaven @ Dec 18th 2005 9:06PM
ChillyWilly.
Actually that's a very good perspective you've put on things actually. I wouldn't give kudos to the developer though, but that's more personal opinion - one shared and explained well by Vance.
And no, Geez had been using my PC (and email) and the username was still saved. Time to set-up new passwords I think, just to piss him off.