New Media and Society Essay: Free/Open Game Development

I decided over the weekend that it was high-time to move my old essay from Flow TV, "The Wii-volution will not be Televised" into the academic arena. In particular it was several recent (not so recent now) articles about Sony "opening" up the PS2 that seemed to push me over the edge. While I have not decided upon a particular venue for this essay yet, though my initial estimation is with New Media and Society.

In part this was due to watching several people at conferences in my relatively recent past talk about precisely what I had written, as if it hadn't ever been mentioned before. I have actually written about it twice now, once in Flow TV and once in my dissertation, but if my words fall in the forest and no one is listening, apparently it doesn't really make a sound or matter.

So, with that in mind, I've decided that given the significant amount of data that I have already gathered on this particular topic that I need to update and think a bit more about. Not to mention that I've seen a handful of recent articles about how Sony is "opening" up PS2 development. At this point I remain largely unconvinced. That isn't to say that a lot has changed in the last couple of years. However, most of the "open" consoles require either the same old licencing/NDA crap (Wii-Ware) or they largely lock you into proprietary languages and tool-chains (XNA Express on the Xbox 360 or the iPhone). I am continually bothered by the "same old stuff" being talked about as open or different, because it certainly isn't. I cannot go to a Sony web page and download an SDK for the PS2. I don't blame Sony for this, but I don't expect to be downright lied to.

Then there is probably the most insidious, which I have to wonder if it will ultimately rear its head in the upcoming Global Game Jam, is the use of proprietary NDA covered technologies that ultimately prevent education and industry wide learning andadvancement . Sony has "opened" the PSP or PS2 in such a fashion here in the US, but those agreements specifically go against any sort of pedagogical ideal that learning is connected with sharing and collaboration.

Still mulling, but pulling things together.

Has Atari Changed Phil Harrison or Phil Harrison Changed Atari?

The unfortunate thing about my first semester teaching was that I felt as if I was never going to come up for air. The fortunate thing about that process is that it means I've been sitting on a pile of thoughts on a variety of videogame development and game industry issues that I've been following for quite a while now. Thus, the next several posts are ones which have remained, have persevered, as tabs in Firefox for nearly two months.

The first series of tabs are perhaps critically linked to the second post I'll be making, but fundamentally about different issues. In my dissertation, especially in the "MOD(ify)-ing Game Development Worlds" sections I talked about some of the critical issues facing the videogame industry. I also talk specifically about how those practices which are hurting the videogame industry are actually many of the practices which are being imported into other "industries," but most directly in other New Media industries. Those two particular chapters are titled:

• "Game Development Practice: A Postmortem"
• "The Game Industry Galaxy: A Postmortem"

Though I tease the Phil Harrison of 2007s Game Developers Conference and his "Game 3.0" slide from the Sony keynote, recent news reports have me wondering if he was really commited to the concept and his job at Atari has created an opportunity for him to pursue Game 3.0. The other possibility is that his experiences at Atari thus far have convinced him that Game 3.0 as the industry is currently structured will never be the lively world of Web 2.0 they wish it to be.

It was that question that got me to thinking about how perspective within the videogame industry has likely shifted how Phil Harrison thinks about what is good for the industry. Recently he's begun talking like me, which honestly is either a good sign or a really bad one for his career. Considering some of the nonconstructive criticism I've received from industry side people, I have to wonder if it was his transition to Atari that made him realize this, or if his departure from Sony had more to do with that.

At the same time, the nonconstructive words I have gotten are often not from "rank and file" developers. They tend to be people who deal regularly with industry executives and manufacturing companies. This is precisely the position that Phil Harrison is in, so I wonder greatly what has influenced this change in thinking and if suddenly it will become all the rage throughout the videogame industry? Or will this movement go just like the movement for improved QoL? What no one has really put together, or at least vocalized yet, is that the two are critically linked.

GamesIndustry.biz - Phil Harrison: It's Time for a Change in Games Development

Atari president Phil Harrison has revealed his belief that the process of game development needs to change, in order to make it a less risky experience overall, and one that will help to promote innovative and creative ideas.
...
"That's pretty much the definition of why projects fail - because you don't know what you're building, you don't know how you're going to build it, you don't know who you're building it for, but you've got 60 people working on it and they've all running in different directions - that's how most games fail.

Gamasutra - Atari's Harrison: Democratizing Development is an Industry Must

Harrison compared the low-cost game creation movement to the Net Yaroze development platform for the original PlayStation, which resulted in a number of "fantastic games", per Harrison, being developed by international teams during the 1990s.

He clearly thinks that bringing amateur and indie developers into the fold with tools such as Unity addresses a real need within the games industry at large. "The comments that I was making [during my keynote] were primarily from an industry perspective."

"Managing the funnel of recruitment, training, educating, and getting the skills shortage, skills gap closed, is kind of an industry-wide problem... "

Harrison concluded: "I was primarily making that comment from an industry perspective, but from an Atari perspective... I think we would want to work with creators of all types, and that's why I'm so interested in Unity, because it does democratize development."

Gamasutra - Atari Boss Harrison at Unite 08: 'Fail Early'

Harrison's keynote, in which he noted that he 'wanted to be here' due to his enthusiasm for the tool, rather than any commercial/strategy interest, evangelized Unity as a tool that could potentially change the game industry, referring to the first time that he saw Unity running in his web browser as "a transformational moment."

Atari lite-C

The Dissertation is Live

[Cross Posted from Shambling, Rambling, Babbling]

My dissertation is now officially online. I’d not posted the file directly, because I assume that RPI’s servers are doing some sort of tracking that I will likely be less inclined to do. It also makes sense to encourage people hoping to download the document should be getting it from a single source, rather than scattered about the various websites that I maintain.

O'Donnell, Casey. 2008. "The Work/Play of the Interactive New Economy: Video Game Development in the United States and India." Dissertation Thesis, Science and Technology Studies, Rensselaer Polytechnic University, Troy, NY.

The other advantage to using this link is that it makes the point clear that the document has been released under the Creative Commons license.

The Sinking of the ESA and the Future of the ESRB...

[Cross Posted from IStC]

For those not in the know, the ESA, or Entertainment Software Association is a U.S. based lobbying and representative group with membership largely compromised of videogame companies. They have done quite a bit of research related to market demographics of gamers in the U.S. More recently they have turned to "educational" programs aimed at school children to teach them the dangers of copyright violation and piracy. Their educational programs contain no mention of "fair use," however.

The ESA is also the parent organization of the ESRB or Entertainment Software Ratings Board. The ESRB is the organization which all console manufacturers require licensees to acquire ratings through prior to distribution. Most computer game software goes through this process as well, primarily because most distributors (WalMart) will not distributed un-rated entertainment software.

Recently, numerous large organizations have begun pulling their ESA memberships. This means that they will not be paying their rather large membership dues which keep the ESA in operations.

Here is a sample of those who have officially dropped their support from the ESA:

• LucasArts (Going to E3, but no longer ESA member)
• Ativision/Blizzard
• Vivendi

Other companies though not dropping out of the ESA entirely have said that they will not be attending E3, the ESA's major industry expo. These companies include those above and:

• Id Software
• NCSoft
• D3Publisher
• Her Interactive
• Majesco
• Bethesda

Perhaps more tellingly, Gamecock (a videogame publishing company) recently released the following video clip:

And EA, or Electronic Arts, has said that this massive set of departures shows a "lack of leadership" at the companies who are leaving, but I think that doesn't quite capture what's going on here.

What this seems to indicate is growing industry dissatisfaction with the ESA. Ultimately, I wonder what ramifications this will have on ratings, because the ESA and ESRB are closely related entities. Have these publishing companies made further decisions about the future of game ratings as well?

Casey O'Donnell

Patents and Copyright, Oh My - (Some of) The Rules of the Game Industry Game

In my RSS reading early this morning I encountered something which piqued my interest. I wish I'd somehow managed to attend this event, because I've been very interested in patent and copyright law as it relates to the video game industry. Even more disturbing was the title of the talk given in London to a group of IGDA members. That title was, "Rules of the Game: Legal Issues in Game Development," which though purported to be about copyright, trademark, and patent law seems at least based on the notes to have been more about copyright and trademark.

Anyway, the following bit caught my eye:

Game Career Guide - IGDA Rules of the Game

How Similar is Too Similar is Too Similar?
"There has to be copying," says speaker Vincent Scheurer, a speaker at the IGDA meeting. "Accidental similarity is not an infringement." Scheurer expressed his disgust with the similarities -- or what he thinks is just plain copying -- between Webzen's art style (left) and Nintendo's in Wind Waker (right). He wonders why the Japanese game giant allows Webzen get away with it, as Nintendo has never filed suit.

Which lends yet even more evidence to a theory that has been developing in my head throughout my research. Namely, that Nintendo has a different vision of what patent, copyright, and trademark in the game industry is supposed to be doing. While Scheurer seems to look down on "plain copying," as he sees it, Nintendo seems to see something else.

This same sort of non-litigation has occurred in the space of patents by Nintendo as well. Nearly every 3rd Person game for the PS2, PS3, Xbox, Xbox360, Gamecube, and Wii actually infringe on several patents by Nintendo related to the use of analog sticks on controllers. Yet Nintendo does not litigate. So it is either (in the case of patents anyway) done out of only self protection, but I'm beginning to suspect that it is also done out of a desire to carve out new areas in the world of game development and to protect them.

So sure, "Webzen get[s] away with it," but maybe Nintendo is willing to carve new directions out for others to also pursue. Remember, frequently Nintendo seems simply happy to be somewhere first, they don't necessarily want to rule those places.

How to Make an Industry Researcher Laugh out Loud

GameSetWatch - Game Developer's Top 20 Publishers - The Sassy Version!

"Activision - Solid - if unimaginative
Atari - First the good news. Bruno's gone. Now the bad news. Bruno's gone.
Codemasters - Plucky, intelligent senior management willing to take a risk.
Disney Interactive - Does what it says on the tin - and no more.
Eidos/SCi - Could yet grab defeat from the jaws of victory.
Electronic Arts - Currently in therapy.
Konami - Trying to be less Japanese. Currently failing.
LucasArts - Looking increasingly rudderless - the industry's biggest vanity publisher
Majesco - Two words - New. Jersey. 'Nuff said.
Microsoft - Succeeding in spite of itself. Will miss Peter Moore more than they know.
Midway - Sumner Redstone's folly. Spectacularly, almost entertainingly bad.
NCSoft - Playing the long game - and has the cash to do it.
Nintendo - It's their ball - and we can all play with it - on their terms.
Sega - One to watch - clever, nimble leadership who know how to succeed.
Sony Computer Entertainment - Sadly lacking leadership skills at the highest level - expect changes in 2008.
Take-Two - GTA 4 better be good.........
THQ - Looking a bit lost - despite some good work, does anyone know what is THQ for?
Ubisoft - The amazing Guillemots and their dedicated senior team run rings around slower, bigger competitors.
Vivendi Games - World class - in parts."

[Disclaimer: GameSetWatch doesn't necessarily think this arch wit is right. And fortunately, most responders to the survey were a little less flippant. We do think he's pretty amusing, though, whoever he is.]

India, Consoles, and a Global Culture of Gamers

The trouble with being a PhD student is that sometimes you see too many connections with stuff that is going on. But then again, perhaps that is what we're supposed to do. Take a whole lot of stuff and bring it together.

I'll start off with India. While I agree that India is ripe for the picking for console developers, I don't really think that the market is going to be very big for a while yet. There are several reasons. One of course is that the contender that actually has the best shot at growing the Indian console market (Nintendo) is at least thus far ignoring the market.

The 360 meets the need of hardcore gamers. The PS3 is astronomically expensive except for the uber wealthy, and no one in India is developing any games for that platform. The 360 on the other hand has XNA Express, which Indian developers are extremely excited about. If you need some indicator of this, I recommend the India IGDA forums.

What does a PS3 offer Indian gamers at this point? I'm just not certain.

The other aspect of this is that mobile gaming is huge in India, and yet again Nintendo has completely ignored India with the DS or even GBA.

So while "demand might be picking up," I read these reports and kind of squint my eyes and think skeptical thoughts. Not because I think they're wrong, but I think they're actually being used to encourage growth. They're putting the cart before the buggy if you will.

In the mean time, you have Indiagames who has largely ported games to the numerous mobile devices, and was recently bought up by a large multinational suddenly interested in games for other parts of the world? That's probably because they have more than handhelds there. The multinational is looking for more money, and they're NOT seeing it in India for the moment.

I think of course they're also trying to get their own developers exposed to making games, because for the most part they've been doing more porting of games than creating original IP. They know they must cut their teeth on some titles first.

Lastly, it is interesting that the Loco Roco developer talks about a Global Culture of Gamers, a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with. However, for the moment that Global Culture is more Japanese/American than it is global.

I would love to see more Global content. I've actually encouraged many an Indian developer to do just that. Bring Indian content to the US, it is possible, it just has to be done the right way.

I also think its important to think not must multi-culturally or uni-culturally. That we can be both multicultural and super-cultural.

CKO

Gamasutra - India's Gaming Market to Reach $125m By 2010

A new report from analyst group iSuppli has said that India's gaming market is showing a "steeper curve" than recent years, forecasting that by 2010 the industry could reach $125 million, up from $13 million in 2006.

Despite the "steep price tag," the company aims to sell 10,000 units by the end of the year, and has thus far sold 1,200, previous to the forthcoming launch of a country-wide promotional campaign.

However, says the group, the PlayStation 3 will face a tough fight from the Xbox 360, which launched earlier in the year, and Microsoft has already "extensively marketed the video game console in the country"

That includes a specially localized title with Yuvraj Singh International Cricket 2007 (pictured), showing what the group calls "its commitment to customizing its titles for Indian tastes."

The group notes that the Xbox 360 is available for the equivalent of $600, a "major price differential compared to its competitor," and notes that "gaming consoles attract high duties, which lead to higher prices. Duties comprise approximately 35 percent of the product price in India, limiting video-game-consoles’ legal sales and promoting the gray market."

Despite the challenges, iSuppli says "the gaming console market is an indicator that demand is picking up for several electronics product segments that now are small in size. It also shows the interest by global electronics companies in tapping into the opportunities available in India."

Said iSuppli associate analyst Ashish Thakre, “The console gaming segment is not very sizeable in India. However, future growth expectations and consumerism are prompting companies to establish themselves in India."

GamesIndustry.biz - India Set for Console Boom

GameDaily - Indiagames Launches International Division

Indiagames today announced the launch of its international mobile publishing and development division. Called IG Fun LLC, this arm of the company will focus on the European and American markets. Indiagames looks to be among the top 5 mobile publishers in its operational territories.

"At IG Fun we operate under the simple idea that the Customer is King and aim to provide fun and exciting games," said Sean Malatesta, VP - Business Development, Indiagames and new CEO of IG Fun LLC. "Our main goals are to provide high quality games, the widest handset coverage and to support our titles with clutter breaking marketing and merchandising."

GayGamer.Net - Loco Roco Developer Speaks

In the interview, he calls for a "Global culture of gamers". A culture that supports games from across the ocean, instead of the nations divided where gamers are not willing to try a game from foreign lands.

Or... Maybe The "Hollywood" Concept is Outmoded

I love grand sweeping statements. Oh, wait, they usually just make people sound like idiots. Now, I know half the time they are purely the function of journalistic attention grabbing, but I'm tired of that excuse really.

I think Asia is going to replace Hollywood with its own internal forms of entertainment. They're likely going to see some revenue from the US and Western Europe. I think we're likely to see more and more local supplies of entertainment. We'll have a disruption of the Hollywood model, though you'll then likely have a re-acquisition phase as these companies are brought into the fold of US Entertainment Multinationals.

Suddenly it looks like Hollywood again. Doh.

Unless companies in these new locations make a specific effort to not be acquired, then this is how I would suspect it will go. Even if they do attempt to avoid being acquired, you have the difficulty of those same multinationals setting up shop in town and hiring away all of your freshly trained workers.

I'm not trying to make this sound worse than it is or vilify the corporation, just stating that at least up until now this is how it seems to be going.

Red Herring - Is Asia the Next Hollywood?

The explosive growth of Internet video gaming could transform Asia into the global entertainment industry’s next development hub, an audience at Silicon Valley’s Kincon innovation conference heard this week.

"I think Asia is the new Hollywood," said Susan Choe, founder and CEO of game publisher Outspark. “"t’s a big statement, but who thought L.A. was going to be the center of the [entertainment world]?"
...
So Outspark and many other companies are betting on Asia’s ability to deliver advanced forms of online entertainment to international markets. The San Francisco-based publisher of Asian games is still in stealth mode, but it is expected to begin testing a multiplayer online game called Fiesta this summer (see http://rh.blogtronix.net/Home/349).

Damn I Need to Publish More...

So, I really hate not existing.

First thing this morning I saw Erin Hoffman's recent "The Escapist" article. Which had me feeling pretty good about myself. That this is a place where I have something to offer. Helping bridge the worlds of academia and the video game industry.

I felt useful and happy that someone who has worked in the industry is calling for a better approach. (More after the excerpt...)

The Escapist - Tighten Those Graphics

The commercial marked the vanguard of a disturbing trend in game education: advertised instructional programs so out of touch with actual game development they couldn't tell a sound effect from a polygon.
...
The bugbear, ultimately, is in the instruction of game design. While game art and game programming are distinct specializations with their own manifold quirks and details, it is possible to be a phenomenal artist and never work on games; it is possible to be a genius caliber programmer and never code gameplay. It is not, however, possible to be a game designer without making games. The notion is patently absurd.

Yet this is exactly what many private college instructors - and even, in some cases, faculty at major universities - are claiming they can do.
...
But that's not the gaming community. Gamers and developers alike were outraged at this commercial; almost curiously so. One YouTube user who posted the video, "randomgenius," was especially upset: "The hill to success is hard enough without money grubbing colleges who offer no true training, but so eagerly take your money." While the advertisement was clearly a marketing mistake rather than representative of what Westwood actually teaches, this sentiment is rife among those trying to get a job making games. That no one goes into games for the money is an accepted truth, and the corollary to that fact is that anyone truly serious about a game career must be intensely passionate about the biz.
...
A number of questions remain to be answered. Can a college really claim to be teaching game development if their faculty has no game development experience? Where does theory end and practice begin? Is it more important to be a strong communicator and teach solid skills, or to have spent time in the trenches? On one issue the industry is unanimous: There is no replacement for live experience. But experience making games does not immediately correlate to skill in instructing and inspiring students.

Time will have the final say - which is unwelcome news for current hopefuls. But the bright side is game instruction

in academia gets better every year, and this can only mean good things for the industry as a whole. Increasing numbers of programs, small and large, are bringing in developers as adjunct instructors, and game analysis itself is a tremendous skill growing in academia apart from its production-based siblings.

But then I see the following up on the IGDA website. Despite all of my activity with the IGDA, and my great efforts to speak about my research, I haven't actually published much. I've got a couple of things in the pipe, but nothing written.

Not good.

Despite a CV full of me being an anthropologist studying the video game industry, I've somehow managed to remain invisible to the rest of the academics.

Getting worse.

So while I'm sitting here trying to get the dissertation written, I'm realizing that what I need to be doing is publishing more smaller articles and talking less, because obviously that isn't working to well.

Coming from a discipline (if I even want to call it that) that specializes in how networks form in disciplines I should have realized that speaking wasn't enough, that something written on the page was necessary.

So I only have myself to blame.

Better get that Games and Culture paper finished...

IGDA - The Professional Identity of Gameworkers

Writing in Escapist magazine (issue 61 of September 5th, 2006), John Szczepaniak laments: “Few know the real truth about who creates videogames [...] It must also be noted with bitter irony that for a medium which is forever debated as being "art," the people behind it seldom get the acknowledgement deserved.” Beyond numerous blogs maintained by game developers and the occasional interview or studio profile in a trade magazine, little indeed is known about the people behind the keyboards. The situation is even worse at the level of academic research: even though studying games is incredibly popular among scholars and students alike, few professors seem to be interested in the professionals (and amateurs) who make the games they play.(1)

As researchers at Indiana University's Department of Telecommunications – where part of the graduate program is designed to train people for jobs in the digital game industry – we took up the challenge. We wanted to know not only who game developers are, but also what they do, how they go about doing it, and what their work means to them. Thus we set out to review the available scholarly literature on the making of computer and video games, reports in trade magazines and journal articles (including IGDA white papers), posts on group and individual weblogs of game developers. Then we went to the GDC of 2006 and 2007 and talked with lots of developers, attended IGDA sessions on Quality of Life issues, e-mailed our contacts in the game industry as well as (the few) colleagues studying gamework at universities all over the world. Put together, this material tells a comprehensive story about the key issues informing and influencing the working lives and professional identity of gameworkers.(2)
...
The ability for external organizations such as unions or industry associations such as the IGDA to influence, establish or enforce industry standards has thus far been marginal. The settlements by EA following the ea_spouse case of extreme workers' rights violations were followed by a movement of hundreds of workers from their Los Angeles based studio to studios in Florida and Canada. As many states (such as Texas and Washington) and countries (like Canada and the U.K.) provide tax incentives and other regulatory waivers to software companies, precedent has been set for game companies to cluster based on local or regional legal benefits and deregulatory frameworks regarding, for example, workers' rights. The South Korean government has even dropped the requirement of military service for those willing to work in the game industry, considering digital games key to the international export of Korean culture. Developer organizations, such as the IGDA, could be an adequate or helpful representation of developer interests but are largely powerless, and thus act more as advocacy groups. As organization structures shift towards outsourcing – an estimated 60% of game studios outsource today, primarily in the areas of localization, cinematics, sound design, game testing, middleware and artwork – and an almost exclusive reliance on contingent labor, the strong social networks needed to take collective action and participate in unions or advocacy groups effectively evaporate.
...
Considering earlier comments on the blurring of work and play among those who play games, as well as the “work as play” ethos in most game development houses, a picture emerges of an environment where the organization of work cannot be seen separately from personal preferences and individual negotiations. Yet such a conclusion runs counter to the signaled managerial practice of a militarized systematic division of labor (at least on paper), that models industry productivity based on milestones. This among a professional context that can be characterized by increasing corporate pressures to bring in significant returns on investment. In this system, the identity of professional game developers must be seen as inseparable from the products of their work – making clear crediting standards vital and all too often vague.

Rant: Taking DRM Even More Seriously for Games...

I love it when something that I've been watching for a while shows up in the mainstream press. I've been saying for almost a year now that Nintendo invented DRM back in 1985 with the introduction of the NES and the 10NES lockout chip.

DRM opponents actually completely and utterly piss me off. They piss me off because they are actually only concerned about the iPod (and they frequently level blame at Apple rather than the record labels). Now let's talk for a second here.

Games have locked you into a single platform for a long time too. So has software in general. The introduction of encryption just upped the ante. It didn't change the game. Microsoft and Autodesk and innumerable other companies have been locking you into their platforms like Office and AutoCAD and 3D Studio Max for years and you haven't peeped. We farted away our rights a long time ago. For some reason we just happened to notice with MP3, ACC+iTunes, Windows Media, etc.

We bought our games for the PC and the Console, perhaps even several consoles. We haven't bothered to say that this wasn't precisely a model we liked. Only the Mac users wondered why they had to switch to PC to play all the cool kid games. Those same Windows users whining about being unable to use their random MP3 players to play stuff from the iTunes music stores told Mac users to quit whining and buy a PC. Yes, you same people sold your rights long ago.

Now we want them back. Thankfully we've managed that to an extent, but have we extended the argument anywhere else? Nope. People are happily trading their rights for the newest version of Windows, Word, Blu-Ray, etc.

IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTENT CONTROL AND DRM. You know what the encryption is really about? It's about the DMCA. Assert your rights, go to jail. Well, not precisely. You can assert your own rights, but don't help anyone else assert their rights.

If we really want to take combatting DRM and platform lock in seriously we need to assert our rights more often, not only once in a while like now.

Locked Away: Do the death throes of music DRM mean anything for games?

It's not exactly been the loudest revolution of all time - in fact, it's been so quiet that you might have missed it - but there has been a genuine revolution in the music industry in the last fortnight. The old order has been overthrown, and it isn't happy; a new, upstart approach, widely lauded by the public and the grass-roots, is taking its place. So far, it's been a bloodless coup, although it's hard to say how long that will last once the financial results start filtering through in the coming quarters.

Actually, it's not entirely true to say that this coup has been bloodless. There's one head rolling in the basket beneath the guillotine blade; it's ugly, unloved, and it's called DRM.

DRM, of course, is something most people in the videogames market will be familiar with at this stage. At its most basic level, DRM is just a concept - it's the idea of using encryption software to control what a user can do with a piece of media they've bought from you.
...
A number of commentators - mostly out in the blogosphere - have opined that this decision must, logically, have a knock-on effect on games and movies. That's not necessarily true, because those mediums (and games especially) actually come with very different consumer expectations to music.

The average consumer is very used to the idea of being able to rip his music, listen to it on multiple devices, copy it between formats and even shuffle it around to create personal playlists. Those expectations, however, don't exist for games, and only exist for a very small (but growing) number of movie consumers.

Games, in particular, are seen as products which only work on one device, which cannot be copied and cannot be modified. Under those circumstances, DRM is far less of an issue than it is with music, and the same pressures which have forced the hands of EMI and Universal simply don't exist.

However, the revolution in music DRM still has important lessons for the videogames market. All too often, videogames companies have displayed a willingness to impose copy protection measures on their software which actually seriously disadvantage or inconvenience legitimate purchasers of the product.

Is this BAD or GOOD for the Industry?

It's interesting that Todd Mitchell's analysis of Nintendo's success is labeled broadly as "bad or good" for the industry. I think the answer is probably more likely that it's good for the industry and bad for publishers. But really that "bad" for the publishers is good in the long run, because it's going to force them to think differently than they've been thinking for quite a while.

Of course the current generation of DS and Wii games coming out of Nintendo is going to sell well. It's some of the more innovative stuff showing up out there. Just like Little Big Planet is going to sell like hot-cakes or why Katamari or Shadow of the Colossus sold well. New and interesting.

Selling a derivative title on a system like the DS or Wii with all of it's available resources isn't going to entice consumers.

While this might "bode poorly for the publishers" right now, perhaps it will force them out of the current rut that they've fallen into lately. And of course Nintendo is going to have some lead time on everyone else. Isn't that why they keep it internal? It gives them some time to milk their product while everyone else catches up.

I'm not necessarily a fan of that model, but I understand why they're doing it. And long term, hopefully publishers internalize this new idea that thinking outside the box is good.

In the mean time Nintendo needs to do a better job of courting independents, getting them to bring new and innovative titles directly to them, because right now the big publishers just don't know how to handle this newfangled stuff.

Analyst: Are Wii And DS Good For The Market?

As reported, Nintendo's fiscal 2007 report showed 23.56 million DS units and 5.84 million Wiis sold, with 123.55 million units of DS software, and 23.84 million units of Wii software -- all far above original expectations from the company and analysts alike.

Much of that software success, however, came from Nintendo itself, with New Super Mario Bros. moving 9.5 million copies, Brain Age selling 8.1 million copies and Nintendogs pushing 7.0 million, with newcomers Pokemon Diamond and Pearl already selling 5.2 million in Japan alone. Wii software, too, was similarly first party dominated by The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess and unbundled versions of Wii Sports.

All of this, says Mitchell, leads him to believe that "Nintendo's success with the DS and Wii bodes poorly for the publishers."

"Both [the Wii and DS] appear to be bringing new gamers into the market. However, this may not be a positive dynamic for the major video game publishers. Nintendo has not only increased the size of the market, but it has also re-segmented it in its own favor, in our view," he said.

"Nintendo is dominating software sales on its popular hardware platforms, leaving the publishers with a smaller slice of an only somewhat incrementally larger pie," added Mitchell, "Moreover, we feel that the likely shorter product cycles of Nintendo's platforms puts the publishers in a permanent catch-up mode."

Despite the ramp up of various third party publishers turning more development efforts to both the DS and Wii platforms, Mitchell concludes that Nintendo's domination of the software landscape isn't a trend due to end anytime soon, adding, "the upcoming releases of Super Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption will highlight this phenomena this holiday season."

Of All the People to Call a Tool of the Industry...

Jason Della Rocca is pretty low on my list. In my dealings with him, he's done more to earn enemies in the industry, but none the less has managed to be a spokesperson for developers around the world. Not really a person I'd expect to see being challenged as a talking head for the video game industry.

I think Jack's biggest problem is that he doesn't actually bother to read anything or actually pay attention to the world around him. Evidence is of no consequence, he's already reached his verdict before a case even begins. Take Jason for example.

Just look through the archives of RealityPanic, the IGDA, or at what he speaks about at events like GDC or the innumerable other events he attends. He talks about reading more / doing more (I heard what you meant...), it's about quality of life, it's about globalization, it's about real issues facing both developers and non-developers alike. To boil him down to "industry (scare quotes) 'spokesperson'" is just silly.

Jack really needs to just read a little bit more and flap his lips a lot less. Those brain scans he's talking about are unproven science. Most psych studies looking at violence and games are inconclusive at best. Most simply call for more studies because they didn't get good conclusive results.

Jason is right. This is a bigger issue than games. It's cultural. It's complicated. But obviously that doesn't please Jack, because he might have to actually read some of these studies then. What about other causes of violence, like religion? Don't see Jack on a crusade (no pun intended) there do we?

I wish we could just ignore him, but the truth is that media outlets like the attention they get from bringing extremists into full view. What it's really going to take is a concerted effort to review all of this material. Who's conducting the studies? Who's funding the studies? What kind of results do they have? Then at any moment he gets up to speak you simply bring these results to bear on his arguments.

Of Idiots, Jackasses and Red Herrings

Gotta say, being called an idiot (advisedly) and a jackass on national news by Jack Thompson feels like a special milestone for me. Not so much for the name calling, but just to see good old Jack get all flustered and frustrated.

Interestingly, despite his flat out attempt to ridicule, dismiss and discredit me (as a paid puppet mouthpiece for the game industry), he emailed me with a formal challenge to an on campus debate (see full text below). That, along with a half-dozen other emails with his thoughts and pointers to articles, etc.

User Generated "CONTENT" (?)

So, there has been a whole lot going on recently about Game 3.0 (apparently Web 2.0 meets Video Games) (And it's really Game 1.0 = Games on Carts/CD's, Game 2.0 = Game 1.0 + Networking, Game 3.0 = Game 2.0 + User Content). As much as I am a fan of thinking about games as media, in particular because console video game systems dominate the game world so much, this isn't quite the same.

So, let's take YouTube for example. You have the ability (perhaps against other media corporations desires otherwise) to take their content and mash it your own way. Perhaps it's just a simple Anime + Music = AMV (Anime Music Video). Perhaps it's your own custom shot or computer generated material set to music. The point is that you have the ability to pull that content from somewhere else and put it at your disposal.

It's not quite the same for video games. It's especially not so much the same for video games. So, I'd like to remix that last Spidey level and redistribute on YouGame. ... ... Ummm... where do I start? Not quite the same.

Now, Little Big Planet "empowers" users by providing them with a world which they can do these things. But what if I want to change a basic mechanic to customize it a bit more? What if I want to make Little Big Nudie Planet? Not to sleight the guys making Little Big Planet, they're doing a phenomenal job, we just have to realize that it's not the same as YouTube.

This is also complicated by the fact that Web 2.0 is founded on a whole lot of things that Game 3.0 just hasn't done. Open API's, Open Protocols, things like XML, and a whole bunch of other things that really empowers users. In the case of console video games you have none of this foundational material.

In many ways I see XNA as having a greater YouTube potential, because though you end up having to do more work, as people develop tools and pieces, you'll see more (and more different) examples of this.

Nintendo and Sony (though Sony seems to be talking a lot) haven't really figured out that they're going to have to open up more than they have to really embrace this idea, and really, if they don't, MS is the one who is going to win.

What publishers are really worried about is:

Making the Social Connection: How Small Developers and Publishers Can Take On Game Industry Giants

But... Even these comments fail to really engage with the barriers of access to the technologies that really offer the most opportunity for companies to make money and build sustainable work environments.

Making the Social Connection: How Small Developers and Publishers Can Take On Game Industry Giants

According to the NPD Group, total computer and video game industry sales hit $13.5 billion in 2006, almost a 20 percent increase from the year before. The vast majority of those sales came from titles released by major publishers and distributors, not from smaller, independent developers. While we depend on the likes of EA and Ubisoft to deliver blockbusters like The Sims and Rainbow Six, we often don't recognize the importance of indie developers in fueling the creative engine of game design and production.
...
Remaining independent means taking on all the costs of creating, producing, marketing and distributing a title. These costs are high, and a crowded marketplace makes it even more challenging for independent developers to make their presence known. In addition, many smaller firms are made up of just a few employees, whose skills skew toward programming or animation rather than sales or business development.
...
Not necessarily. Since the late 1990s, some small companies have gone the direct route, selling their games online or making their titles open source as a means by which to generate a player base. For example, Positech Games, based in the U.K., was recently highlighted on the popular developers' forum GameDeveloper.net, for its claims to have reached the $100,000 mark purely through online sales.
...
Social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook have transformed the way that independent filmmakers and musicians reach new audiences and sell their work. The next wave of social networking, a trend Sony Computer Entertainment calls "Game 3.0," will change the way independent game creators take their games to market.
...
But these sites lack a crucial element – game developer participation. FairShare, a new technology my company announced at the Game Developers Conference (GDC) this year, is, amongst other things, designed to connect developers with players through game-related social networking. An engine that runs underneath gaming portals, FairShare lets players sample new games through a try-before-you-buy option. It offers incentives for players to share, recommend and give feedback on new games, and it gives developers a chance to sell games, gain visibility and build their reputations among the game aficionado community.

The Game 3.0 future for independent developers will be rooted in social networks, where developers can make their games available online, players can try, buy, share, and offer feedback on the games, and developers can respond, making changes or developing new titles based on that feedback.

Just as Facebook and Myspace make every participant an owner of his or her own content on the Web, a Game 3.0 style portal must provide a sense of ownership for both players and developers. For indies, the Game 3.0 trend opens new opportunities for connecting with gamers who want to buy their titles, as well as the chance to build communities with other developers and gamers.

Game publishers threatened by user-generated content

Got an idea for a video, a song, a podcast, a game? Make it, put it online, and people will find it. We all benefit from the mind-bogglingly wide variety of stuff to consume, and the competition increases quality for everyone. The dinosaurs who have become rich off outmoded means of production and distribution are quaking in terror. Some, like SCEA president Phil Harrison, are making attempts to adapt and thrive.

What Do Media Executives Fear?

User-generated content was named by 57 percent of respondents as one of the top three issues they face today. More that 70 percent believed that social media would continue to grow, while only 3 percent said they viewed social media as a fad.
...
"Traditional, established content providers will have to adapt and develop new business and monetization models in order to keep revenue streams flowing. The key to success will be identifying new forms of content that can complement their traditional strengths."

BBC on the Game Industry

There is an excellent article on the BBC website examining the video game industry. I hate to say it, but it actually exemplifies some of the differences in coverage that can be offered from blog sites to those on new sites which have attempted to get at the deeper story, willing to take a little extra time to dig more deeply.

VIDEO GAMES SALES
Consoles games
2006: $11.2bn
2007: $12.2bn
PC games
2006: $3.9bn
2007: $3.7bn
Source: Screen Digest

Games industry enters a new level

Hardware makers are losing hundreds of dollars on every console sold, and games publishers face an "increasingly difficult environment, as rising development costs and small user bases [mean] that return on investment in next generation games development is unlikely to be achieved before 2008," according to media analysts Screen Digest.

More importantly, though, the video games publishers are facing a revolution of their business model.
...
"Scale does matter" in this industry, says Mr Florin, because "the more complex games become" the more tools are needed "to keep costs under control".
...
The real money spinners are console games, but subject to the ups and downs of the hardware cycle as consoles launch or go out of fashion.

To ensure steady revenues, says Mr Florin, games publishers therefore have to build strong brands.
...
"Wonderful innovative titles are sometimes ignored [by consumers], while some repetitive titles with minor improvements in game play and graphics provide much better returns to the games publishers," he says.
...
"You only learn what you can do with these platforms over time, and as a result using 100% of Playstation 2 [PS2] is nearly as good as today's starting point of PS3 games," says Mr Florin.
...
Games publishers face a dilemma, though. To reduce cost, they would love to put their games on as many platforms as possible.

It used to be relatively easy to port a game from one console to the next. Nintendo's "Gamecube, the Xbox and PS2 were much more alike," says Mr Florin.

Next generation platforms are different, he says: "Now we have to have very distinctive games for each machine and can't port that much."

That plays into the hands of the console makers, who want exclusive games to lure gamers to their platform.