Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

They say it’s just legend, but when a Nerd gets angry it is rumored that their adolescent rage has the power to level nations. After watching this video, I wouldn’t doubt it. While this really doesn’t constitute as news, I think a little light hearted comedy couldn’t hurt to bad. The film was recorded at this years E for All, and stars “Swarm” of Team SK gaming getting a little emotional at a WoW match. Don’t act like you haven’t been this kid at one point, I’ll be the first to admit I have thrown my controller in a “Nerd Rage” (I love that phrase). Then again, I didn’t do it in front of hundreds of people. At one point it looked like he might strike his teammate, or even throw his keyboard.

So kids, whenever a friend asks why isn’t gaming an olympic sport, you show them this video.

Of course the first thing that entered my mind when I read this was the Wii. However, there are other video games out there that provide similar benefits. One India reports:

“A recent active gaming concept that allows players to experience various activities (e.g., bowling, fishing, tennis, golf) in a virtual world is the XaviX gaming system (SSD Company Ltd., Shiga, Japan),” the authors said.

“In addition to the exercise gaming modalities, the XaviX system includes a gaming mat (XaviX J-Mat) that allows participants to travel the streets of Hong Kong at a walk or a run, avoiding obstacles and stamping out ninjas,” they added.

Robin R. Mellecker, B.Sc., and Alison M. McManus, Ph.D., of the Institute of Human Performance, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, measured heart rate and energy (calorie) expenditure in 18 children age 6 to 12 (average age 9.6) during a 25 minute gaming protocol.

“Our data demonstrate that the two active gaming formats result in meaningful increases in energy expenditure compared with the seated screen environment. The next step is to test whether active gaming interventions can provide sustainable increases in childhood physical activity,” the authors said. The study is published in the September issue of Archives of Paediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.

Not bad, eh? I think the Wii is still the king when it comes to these kinds of things but I am also thinking that more and more in the industry will follow suit.

OK, so you can’t talk your 10-year-old into signing up for soccer, gymnastics or even horseshoes. (Though this could be indicative that you have bigger problems than your child’s weight.) It’s still possible to introduce the concept of physical activity to your children on their terms. A study published this week in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine describes the difference between various video games and concludes that some of them could help a youngster shape up.

The study, from researchers at the Institute of Human Performance, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, found that children burn more than four times as many calories per minute playing an active video game than playing a seated game and that heart rate is much higher with the active game. The video-game obsession among children coupled with growing rates of childhood obesity have concerned parents and health professionals for years, but the advent of the exercise video game may be a trend everyone can get behind.

Source: LA Times

Veterans of the Super Nintendo have always held a spot in their heart for the time-play classic Chrono Trigger. It remains one of the most highly sought-after titles for the vintage system and has carried that hype over to the Nintendo DS in style with its recently announced and dated dual-screen iteration. Chrono Trigger is sure to be a big hit on the DS for several reasons, not least of which is the massive install base that Nintendo’s diminutive handheld has garnered over the years. The DS steadily outsells all its opponents on a fairly consistent basis and when you have the highest install base of any handheld currently in production, every title has its fair shot at success.

Another factor that is sure to contribute to Chrono Trigger’s eventual domination is the sheer amount of demand that the title manages to maintain a full 13 years after its initial release on the SNES. Chrono Trigger set an extremely high standards for sprite-based role-playing games when it burst into gamers’ lives, that some say has not been matched to this day. Used copies of the Super Nintendo version regularly sell for $60 or $70, with sealed copies selling for hundreds, no questions asked. This is the result of a combination of nostalgia on the part of older gamers and the desire of younger gamers to try out a classic. Add to that the fact that most individuals who already own the game have no intention of letting it slip out of their grasp, and you’ve got the recipe for an extremely sought-after cartridge that was just begging for a handheld remake.

RPG’s have already met with impressive success on Nintendo’s handheld and with remakes of several Final Fantasy titles already bringing role-playing lovers in from all over the world, it should come as no surprise that developer Square Enix saw an opportunity to bring another one of their classic franchises back to prominence. The success of the genre might actually comes as a bit of a surprise to some, considering the very nature of role-playing games. In general, RPGs require a seemingly endless amount of time and patience in order fully enjoy, so porting them to a system that thrives on short bursts of enjoyable gameplay seems to fly in the face of tradition. Still, the DS manages to make its way over that hurdle by a simple hardware design choice that dates back to the console’s original launch. Nintendo designed the console with the ability to pause any game in an instant, simply by closing the case. This allows every RPG fanatic the ability to throw themselves into the world of Chrono Trigger, and then effectively stop time (pun intended) whenever they see fit.

The DS itself has reached some truly ridiculous sales figures since its release and it seems like every adolescent in the US and Japan must own at least of the handhelds in order for such numbers to be possible. Nevertheless, the system continues to sell at an astronomical rate and amongst the countless pet simulators and movie tie-in titles, Chrono Trigger is sure to set itself apart and find its audience with little trouble.

Few avenues of journalism are so dimly regarded as the specialist gaming press. Viewed as little more than hobbyists covering an adolescent industry, game journalists earn few accolades and command little respect from their peers in the older mediums. And readerships too can be vicious in their skepticism, accusing gaming websites and magazines of being fawning mouthpieces for the industry they cover, their writers rarely breaking real stories or offering anything approaching lucid commentary or incisive critique.

Poorly paid and overworked, a minority of game journalists continue to cover games full-time into their thirties, drawn away instead by more lucrative jobs in gaming PR, acquisitions, consultancy or development itself.

But despite this grim, stereotypical overview, the gaming press is far from an impotent one. The disrespect it attracts is more than matched by raw readership figures, which would be the envy of many a news editor in 2008. The biggest-hitting gaming websites attract in excess of a million unique hits a month, and even boutique-y publications, such as Edge Magazine, while boasting monthly ABCs of only 31,304 issues, exert a global influence on the industry and its consumers that few specialist publications manage.

As the games industry matures and diversifies, so too does the range, breadth and ability of its commentators, reviewers and critics. There are those who are writers first and gamers second, who love the games industry enough to be able to examine its products with white honesty, rooting out the real stories behind the precision-written press releases. And, of course, leading, coordinating and inspiring these writers to produce their best work, work that bucks the stereotypes, are the editors who steer the publications, define their tone and set their boundaries.

GameSetWatch directed a clutch of identical questions to five of western gaming journalism’s most prominent editors: Eurogamer’s Tom Bramwell, IGN’s Tal Blevins (Vice President of Games Content), Kotaku’s Brian Crecente, Edge Magazine’s Tony Mott and Gamespot’s Ricardo Torres.

In the interview we ask each man (and they are all men) for their perspective and approach to game journalism, the relationship between advertising and editorial, what the most popular articles and posts are with readers and what advice they would give to young writers looking to get into the industry.

All five editors initially agreed to take part but only three actually delivered their answers. Their replies are presented here in full to offer a snapshot, albeit partial, into the state of the specialist
gaming press in mid-2008.

What, if anything, is wrong with videogame journalism and how are you working to fix it?

Tony Mott (Edge): There's so much of it out there today, especially on the internet, that it's difficult to have a catch-all opinion on the state of game journalism. There's certainly an awful lot of shit out there, but there are lots of people happy to read shit about videogames in the same way they're happy to watch shit on TV or read shitty newspapers. If enough people are satisfied with that -- if it's fulfilling their needs, such as they are -- then it's serving a purpose, right? It's just different to what we try to do. I don’t think we’re in a position to 'fix' anything, and it would probably be arrogant to think that it's in any way our responsibility.

Tal Blevins (IGN): The biggest thing that I think is wrong with "videogame journalism" is classifying it as "videogame journalism." What makes reporting on videogames any different from any other form of entertainment reporting or product critiquing? One of my biggest pet peeves is when someone compares IGN to a publication like The Economist. Compare IGN to Entertainment Weekly or At the Movies, not The Economist. Writing about videogames is nothing to be ashamed of, and I don't feel the need to try and justify it as anything more than it is. Are we investigative journalists or war correspondents? No, but we don't want to be, either. We strive to be just as accurate, in-depth, and compelling as any publication in existence, but we're also very aware of our audience, and we write with them in mind.

Tom Bramwell (Eurogamer): Videogame journalism isn't as glamorous or highly paid as film, music or literary criticism, so the quality threshold isn't as high. Eurogamer's popular, so I can employ the best writers and that's how I try and fight that. I also evaluate what we're doing and listen to feedback from our readers and contributors as well as other people who work in the games industry.

It's a bland answer. I don't have a manifesto or anything exotic. But I think I have the right principles and instincts and I think that shows in the site's growth and the level of respect for it among our readers, peers and folks within the games industry.

What differentiates your publication to your rivals?

Tony Mott (Edge): I have to be honest and say that I don’t read enough other multi-format magazines to be able to offer an opinion.

Tad Blevins (IGN): At IGN, we stress the importance of entertaining our readers as well as informing them, so we write with a very casual voice and try to come across as if we're talking to an old friend. We also strive to expose our readers to more than just games, so we report on other subjects that gamers are interested in, such as movies, television, comic books, music, and more.

Tom Bramwell (Eurogamer): Having not edited GameSpot or IGN, I can't answer in terms of how they are run except to say that we're privately funded and they are part of big organisations, but there are a number of obvious differences.

Europe may be the "most important continent" in Phil Harrison's phrase, but the people who control access to games and their developers rarely see it that way, so we have to fight harder for big stories and exclusives than our US rivals.

Our location also means that our readers are very sceptical, and the only way to satisfy them is to employ writers of exemplary skill and pedigree, so our core staff and contributors are veterans of broadsheet newspapers, fierce trade-press environments and prestigious magazines like Edge and PC Gamer UK.

We also publish in four languages (English, French, German and Portuguese) with another four set to come online this year. Individual territories have complete editorial autonomy but we share resources and cooperate when it's useful.

Which has been your most popular post/ article in the part six months? Why do you think that is?

TM (Edge): We had lots of positive feedback on the cover feature we did focusing on the making of the Grand Theft Auto series. It was popular because GTA is obviously such a huge deal, but also because we were fortunate enough to spend a lot of time with Sam Houser and the Rockstar team when we were putting it together. Actually, we still have plenty of interview content left over from that article. We'll have to make it available online soon.

TB (IGN): The Grand Theft Auto IV review was our most popular article. We published the first online review, and the franchise has always been very popular with our readers.

TB (Eurogamer): Oli Welsh's review of Metal Gear Solid 4 is our best-performing feature of 2008.
Early MGS4 reviews were controversial because reviewers had to sign up to complicated review guidelines that restricted what they could say, but after exploring those thoroughly and discussing them with Oli it was obvious we could still say everything we had to say.
Oli's review also drew attention because he didn't give the game 100 marks on a 100-point scale as some of our competitors did.

Who's the best videogame publisher to work with and why?

TM (Edge): I don’t have a favourite. That probably wouldn’t be healthy. All I'd say is that any company putting out good games tends to be easier to work with, for obvious reasons.

TB (IGN): We're in contact with nearly every publisher on the planet, big or small, and we really take the same approach with them all, which is to inform our readers of gaming titles, news, and events from around the world.

TB (Eurogamer): The level of access to games and developers that UK PRs are empowered to provide varies from publisher to publisher - certainly compared to how equivalent roles are fulfilled in the US - so you can't easily compare the qualities of people working here.

However, there are a number of very devoted gamers in the ranks of UK PR, and while their job is to manage expectations and public opinion many of them are pragmatic and honest when it comes to bad games and brilliantly productive on the best ones. PR in the UK does more for the European games industry than a lot of the people who sign their paycheques.

How do you balance the needs and pressures of your own publishing parent with those of your readership?

TM (Edge): We’ve never been about chasing reader numbers, so we’ve never suffered from management pressure. We just make a magazine about games we're interested in. Sometimes we put a game on the cover that has obvious commercial appeal, and sometimes it's something a little bit more leftfield -- this year we've run covers on both Grand Theft Auto IV and MadWorld, for example. Hopefully our readers are interested in the same games as us. If they're not, they usually write in to let us know about it.

TB (IGN): We really see them as being very complementary to one another. Without the readers we wouldn't have a publication, and without a publication we would have the readers. We're very cognisant of keeping the needs of the readers a top priority at IGN, because without their trust in us as an editorial unit, we wouldn't have a successful Website.

TB (Eurogamer): The question implies that the needs and pressures of my boss differ to those of our readers, but I don't think that's true. They both want interesting and timely content on the website because it drives traffic upwards, so that's what I try to commission.

What are the ways in which videogame publishers put direct or indirect pressure on your publication to inflate/ weight coverage of their games?

TM (Edge): I honestly don’t think anyone bothers to try that sort of stuff with us, so I couldn’t say.

TB (IGN): It doesn't happen often, but we have had a few requests not to run a review before a product is released unless we give it a favorable score – which we’ve never agreed to and violates our editorial review policy. Some publishers also don't send us pre-release review builds unless we promise a certain score – which we also never agree to. We would never change our score just to post a review early, so we just wait until the game is publicly available in stores. At that point, we go and buy the game and rate it as we see fit.

TB (Eurogamer): Very few actually do this in my experience. The ones who do will threaten to withdraw advertising money or access to games we want to write about. My boss insulates me from the former and sometimes you have to accept the latter.

What’s been the most dramatic fallout from a publisher when you’ve not bowed to this pressure?

TM (Edge): See previous answer.

TB (IGN): We may get a terse phone call after the fact, but it usually doesn't affect the relationship in the long run. The publishers understand that we have to maintain an independent voice lest we damage our credibility with our readers.

TB (Eurogamer): We've had five-figure advertising deals pulled and I've been shouted at on the phone a number of times.

Which other videogame publication do you enjoy reading for commentary (not news) and why?

TM (Edge): I like some of the things the guys on the official UK PlayStation magazine have been doing. I very much like NGamer for its personality. I think N'Gai Croal's done some interesting things online, coming at the industry from a slightly different perspective to most game journos, though obviously a disclaimer applies in his case because we have him on board writing a column in Edge. I recently enjoyed a piece written by Bill Harris, about playing videogames with his son, on Level Up.

I don’t really follow one publication over another. It’s all a bit difficult for me, because I've been reading computer and videogame magazines for something like 25 years, and working on them, on and off, for about 15, so nowadays it takes something a little different to catch my eye.

TB (IGN): I enjoy reading N'Gai Croal's Level Up blog. I think he has an interesting take on the industry, and is an entertaining and brutally honest writer.

TB (Eurogamer): I like blogs like Kotaku and Joystiq because they're direct and uncompromising. My favourite magazines are Wired and Private Eye. I think the majority of British newspapers are appalling but I find Observer interviews amusing.

In terms of books I very much enjoyed Raph Koster's Theory of Fun and I'm reading Jim Rossignol's recent effort, This Gaming Life, at the moment, and it's very thoughtful and observant.

How do you work to maintain integrity in the face of advertisers?

TM (Edge): We've all heard stories about advertisers leaning on publications in an attempt to influence review scores but, again, that's not something we've ever experienced on Edge.

TB (IGN): Our editorial department and sales department are totally separate, and even work on different floors in our office building. The editorial teams have no prior knowledge to what ads are running before they appear on the site, and don't know how much a publisher is spending on any given campaign.

TB (Eurogamer): By having absolutely no professional connection with them whatsoever!

Videogame review scores: pointless or pertinent?

TM (Edge): It's a weird one. On the one hand you want to say that you shouldn't need to put a number at the end of an opinion in order to communicate what you think, but then you look at how people talk about your magazine and see that most of the discussion centres on the numbers that appear at the end of its reviews.

A few years ago, when I wasn't working on Edge, the guys on the team experimented one issue by removing review scores, but the experiment didn't really work because all of the scores merely appeared in a group at the end of the review section rather than alongside the individual reviews. Perhaps we could try something like that again in the future, but not include scores at all. I’m not convinced that the majority of readers would really go for it, though.

The problem, I think, is that review scores have existed for so many years that they've become deeply embedded in the commercial critical process. So it’s a conditioning thing. It can get silly, of course, when you're trying to differentiate between things like 93% and 94%, but also 7 and 8, and 6 and 7, and so on. Actually, the other day I was saying to someone that I'd like to launch a videogame magazine called Seven, which focused exclusively on games that were 7/10s. You could have some fun with that. Well, for one issue, after which the joke probably wouldn't work.

TB (IGN): I'd say review scores are pertinent, but they don't live on their own. Review scores are a useful gauge for readers to compare games that are released around the same time on the same platform -- seriously though, you can't compare an Xbox 360 score today to a PC score from 1993 -- but they don't live by themselves; the text is the most important part of any review, and should do the job of explaining what a score means. I've seen so many arguments on message boards similar to "IGN gave this game a 9.2 when the game is clearly a 9.4," but I rarely see the a debate along the lines of "IGN said this game fell short as an overpowering emotional experience, but I found the scene where Sir Yardley sacrifices his own life for that of his squire to be truly moving."

TB (Eurogamer): I'm not sure there are absolutes in this debate. Review scores add context to a writer's comments and I find them valuable. I think our readers do too, although there are always debates about how things are weighted or explained.

How do you balance the need to attract readers with avoiding sensationalism and maintaining balance?

TM (Edge): As I say, we've never been driven by reader numbers. We just try to make a mag about games we're interested in.

TB (IGN): Our editorial philosophy has been to exude passion, but only when that passion is warranted. As I said earlier, our voice is as if we are a friend sitting on the couch next to you talking about this game that you probably haven't seen yet, so we want you to know when we are excited. With that said, we also want you to know when we are disappointed, or when we're rather indifferent. As writers covering an industry that such be fun and exciting to write about, we think it's important that our personalities, enthusiasm, and passion shine through the page.

TB (Eurogamer): As much as I'd like more readers tomorrow, I'm more interested in having even more readers on the same day next year. They won't come back unless you treat them with respect.

On past evidence, what is the most effective way to generate hits to your website?

TM (Edge): Anything with a negative spin tends to get attention. It seems that you’ll always attract a bigger audience by giving something a kicking. There are people out there who seem to make half-decent livings out of it, actually.

TB (IGN): It's really about maximizing information, speed, and creating a community where readers feel like they are a part of the site.

TB (Eurogamer): First, writing about the biggest games every day and being honest about them. I know it sounds obvious, but it works. Second, looking at what did or didn't work and then recalibrating.

How long do you expect your writers to have played a game before submitting review copy and why?

TM (Edge): I don’t think you can make a hard and fast rule. If you want to include in your review section a 70-hour RPG but only have time enough to play it for 50 hours, should you hold the review until the following issue? Most reasonable people would say that you shouldn’t, that 50 hours is enough. In an ideal world, of course I’d like every game to be completed before the reviewer arrives at a conclusion, but that’s only practical up to a point. I think this discussion and the one about review scores are probably longer ones than we have time for here, though.

TB (IGN): Our reviewers complete most games before they submit their final reviews, but it's not a requirement. Some games are simply unable to be "finished" (MMOs, sports games, etc.), while others don't necessarily have to be fully concluded in order to write a balanced, insightful review. With that said, our reviewers always have the last say in the review process, and we tell them they don't have to post a review until they feel comfortable giving their final judgment.

TB (Eurogamer): I don't employ reviewers unless they're enthusiastic about and devoted to games, but you have to take a certain amount on trust. I expect our contributors to play the game until they know what they're talking about, and that varies depending on the game.

What advice would you give to a writer wanting a career in games journalism? Would you try to put them off? Why?

TM (Edge): If the candidate was only a mediocre writer I would absolutely put them off entering game journalism, because there are more than enough mediocre writers already out there. But I would encourage anyone with talent to go for it, because they will stand out -- they have the opportunity to make a difference.
If someone was applying for a job on Edge I’d tell them to write something original about gaming. Don’t send in another review of Ico or Rez. I’ve seen too many of them already. In fact, don’t write a review at all. Reviewing a game is one of the most basic activities in game journalism, so give us some copy that proves you’re already capable of something more demanding.

One advantage prospective journos have today is that there are so many more entry points than there used to be. I've hired plenty of people whose writing talents I first became aware of via the internet. If you're any good, there's no excuse any more. When I applied for my first job in game magazines I bought a second-hand Amstrad PCW256 word processor, printed out my sample copy on a ‘near letter-quality’ dot-matrix printer, and then had to walk to town to fax over my sample copy. Then, obviously, when I got home, my dad and my mother killed me and danced about on my grave, singing ‘Hallelujah’. You try and tell that to the young people of today, though, and they won't believe you.

TB (IGN): Keep writing, keep trying, and keep bugging whoever you can until you hear a definite "yes" or "no." Because of the few open slots and the large number of people who would love to write about videogames for a living, it's a tough career to step into. Yes, you have to be a gamer and know your videogame history, but don't overlook the most important skill of being a good writer. Also, learn to live meagerly, because this kind of work doesn't pay much, and it's coupled with the unforgiving truth of being centered in three of the most expensive areas of the country: San Francisco, New York City, and Los Angeles. A taste for ramen is a good trait to have.

TB (Eurogamer): Read and write. When you're reading, pay no attention to literary prestige or commerciality, just read everything you can get your hands on! Then work out why it works or doesn't work on you. And write all the time - but you shouldn't need to be told to do that. A good barometer for whether you're improving is if you hate everything you write within about half an hour of finishing it. That's how it goes!

Two years ago, many cynics had pronounced that it was "Game Over" for Sony's domination of the home console market after a lacklustre showing at E3 2006 and PS3's unprecedented price.

At the time Screen Play wrote: "while it can be argued that the price represents good value for the cost of the individual components and the machine's PC-like functionality, Sony must expect that its rivals will enjoy a big early lead in the next-generation battle because the PS3's initial price is beyond many consumers."

Now that its price is starting to fall and its software library expanding, PS3 is gaining momentum and reeling in the 360, yet Sony is still struggling to convince significant numbers of shoppers that they should pay a premium for the console and has not been able to generate the same excitement as the Wii.

Click here to read the original "Beyond tomorrow" blog on from two years ago, then click below for some more of my observations on what has happened since the article was originally published.

Despite all the pessimism surrounding the PS3, its recent improving sales have been for many of the reasons I identified two years ago, such as Sony's record of software innovation from its internal studios, and its ability to simultaneously satisfy both hardcore gamers while reaching far beyond the traditional adolescent male audience.

In particular, the embracing of user-generated content and online communities via the likes of LittleBigPlanet, Buzz: Quiz TV, SingStar and Home looks likely to pay significant dividends in differentiating PS3 from its competitors.

At this year's E3, Sony was quick to stress that there are more upcoming exclusives for PS3 than any other platform. Yet Sony's commitment to introducing new franchises has also backfired on many occasions - beyond the likes of Resistance, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted, MotorStorm and the PixelJunk titles there lies Heavenly Sword, Calling All Cars, Folklore, Eye of Judgment, Pain and Lair - promising concepts that have lacked polish.

But the biggest issue with the PS3 today is one that wasn't evident two years ago - that multi-format titles from third-party developers on PS3 are routinely delayed or inferior in quality compared to the Xbox 360 versions.

It severely tarnishes Sony's message that gamers should pay a premium for PS3 when players are often better served buying a 360 version of a game.

Two years ago I mentioned that big-name exclusives from third-parties are likely to "dry up" if PS3's price doesn't fall quickly enough, which has proved correct.

But despite the attention garnered by the recent Final Fantasy XIII defection to 360, high development costs have all-but ensured the end of blockbuster third-party exclusives. I don't think this worries Sony too much, as they would feel their internal developers can produce more innovative system-selling software than Microsoft, although both are a long way behind Nintendo in this department.

The addition of tilt-sensing capabilities to the PS3 controller has been a disaster.

My view two years ago was that Sixaxis might be a pragmatic and wise alternative to the Wii Remote that didn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I was obviously very wrong, either because of a lack of imagination from developers or inherent technical limitations of the hardware.

Two years ago I also praised Sony for their "admirable commitment to backward compatibility that preserves consumers investment in PSone and PS3 software and encourages loyalty to the brand". Stupidly, Sony has since squandered the good PR it got from backward compatibility and removed the feature to save mere pennies. It's madness.

Like two years ago, Sony is still playing catch-up in the online arena, but differences between Xbox Live and PlayStation Network are becoming increasingly minor and PS3 owners certainly appreciate that they don't have to pay a subscription fee.

The (now gaming focused) Home service should also soon also provide a more accessible and less intimidating online community, which will be particularly attractive to newcomers and might help sell some PS3 systems.

But above all else, just like two years ago, price remains the biggest handicap for PS3.

Blu-ray movie playback and additions like the upcoming Play TV personal video recorder functionality do represent value for money for many console shoppers. But looking at gaming alone, PS3's pricetag compared to its competitors is still hard to justify for many consumers.

Last week gamers got an example of the breathtaking ignorance of some Australian politicians regarding a medium that entertains millions of people around the country.

Groups like the Games Developers' Association of Australia and the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia have found their campaigns for parity with the film industry regarding tax breaks and product ratings have been stymied by politicians who seem unable to grasp the size and potential of the interactive entertainment industry, nor understand why video games might appeal to so many people.

Yet with over half of Australians having picked up a controller to play a video game in the past year, the games-playing demographic widening rapidly beyond its adolescent beginnings, and over $1.5 billion spent on gaming software and hardware over the past 12 months, it is only a matter of time before some Australian politicians realise that game players are also voters.

One such politician has emerged this week. As his press release states, "gamers in the Australian Capital Territory will be pleased to learn that ACT Democrats candidate Greg Tannahill is one of their own".

Mr Tannahill, 28, says he is "a lifelong video gaming enthusiast and industry commenter (sic)" and is standing for office at the October 18 ACT Election in the seat of Molonglo.

The candidate says affordable housing, quality education and comprehensive public transport are key issues for Canberrans, but gaming remains close to his heart.

"Politicians don't understand video gaming and aren't interested in learning", says Mr Tannahill.

"There's good reason for people to be angry about the way games are treated by our parliaments, our media, and our classification board. I think gamers want to see leaders who have real respect for what they are passionate about, both as a pastime engaged in by millions of Australians from all walks of life, and as a multi-billion dollar industry which our governments should be attracting and nurturing."

Mr Tannahill's blog makes for interesting reading, particularly his post about last week's ABC Q&A program, which he describes as "terrifying".

Of course, not all Australian politicians are as ignorant as the panel that appeared on Q&A last week. Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls is particularly noteworthy - he has thrown his considerable political weight behind the proposed introduction of an R18+ games rating.

But let us all hope that more Australian leaders start to listen and learn about a medium that is obviously so foreign and frightening to them. Otherwise they might just discover that a new generation of politicians like Greg Tannahill can successfully harness a block of voters who are feeling increasingly frustrated and unrepresented by their leaders.

These comments are related to Microsoft’s E3 conference and showing. You can read an account here.

Considering that Microsoft has started loosing its grip on exclusive 3rd party properties to multiplatform-ism, unaided by weak first party support, they have done a fantastic job this E3 with the limited resources available. Much like my predictions, they flaunted their exclusives while added value to their already existing services.

As for their showing of casual games, I’m also quite pleased with how they avoided copying motion control and instead focused on key software to appeal to the casual audience (even though they still don’t understand them and everything except for Lips is destined for complete failure). The new front end and Mii styled rip offs are neat as well. What frustrates me though is how they have tarnished a more than solid showing with rude and outlandish comments regarding the “console war” and how the Xbox 360 is trampling all over it, casual gaming and the Playstation 3.

While Microsoft ought to be pleased about Final Fantasy XIII making the leap to their console, such a move doesn’t represent the pulling power of the Xbox brand at all, it represents a struggle to break even in a consolidating industry. This didn’t stop Microsoft’s cock headed gloating by Don Mattrick; “Final Fantasy joins a long list of former PlayStation franchises finding a new home on Xbox 360,”. He later raves of how Microsoft have been tallying the number of previous “Playstation exclusive” games making the switch to Microsoft’s console.

Of course, this is PR nonsense designed to feed the fanbase and as such his logic is weak as many of the PSone’s big brands (Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, Silent Hill etc.) all went multiplatform long before Microsoft appeared on the scene. Is this really necessary though? It gets worse, of course.

The same guy (he is the Xbox 360 boss BTW) later proclaims “I’m willing to declare here today that Xbox 360 will sell more consoles worldwide this generation than PS3,”. Sony are rigging for the long haul on this one and the early entrant is already dancing a victory tune, I don’t think so. Once again though why does he need to make these sorts of remarks? Keep reading though:

“Our games are everywhere. The hardcore are devouring our biggest blockbusters. Fathers and sons are playing their favorite sports games. Rock-star grandmas are taking over our living rooms…and fun-to-play games are inspiring the new family game night. Today, our industry belongs to everyone.”

Obviously some pretty fraudulent stuff here, this is a segue into their casual showing BTW. Common sense among the industry paints a different picture of adolescent kids, harkening for digital blood and fowl mouthed abuse, contradicting this PR nonsense. Getting over the natural PR spin though, why are Microsoft doing this? It is common knowledge that they struggle with an expanded audience so why is he pretending as though the console is doing some form of public service? They haven’t got there yet! This is worsened by other comments stating that the Xbox 360 is “fuelling growth” within the industry. If this quote is indeed true and the 360 is already capturing a wide audience (and fueling growth) then why does Micrsoft need to introduce a series of games marketed towards the casual audience, especially when they have never properly done this before? It’s just poorly implemented positioning designed to align them with the affluent success of the Wii and away from the Playstation 3. Unfortunately for them Sony has always been a better innovator (even plugging into the casual audience before Nintendo, you’ll have to be European or Australian to fully appreciate that one though).

There were also derogatory comments, carefully put, regarding the new Avatar people (ala Miis) which will feature in several upcoming games. Even though the Avatars do appear a little child like in nature Microsoft were clear to point out that they wanted them to “not to look like a toy,” but instead be “stylized”. The use of the word ‘toy’ in this case, I think is a light stab at the Mii characters on the Wii, you can tell as Microsoft has used the word ‘toy’ before to dismiss Nintendo products before. Is this not further proof that they are too arrogant to ever understand this “casual” audience?

One last piece of banter was a comment made by Shane Kim who stated that the “Xbox 360 is the clear leader” when it comes to music based games. I guess this is why Xbox Music Mixer was such a success, right? Depending on your tastes, this might be true and the backing (sales figures) this time are not ridiculous. I guess this was said unaware that Nintendo would later drop a bombshell announcing the Cow Bell as being an instrument in Wii Music. ^_^

What frustrates more than these blatantly silly quotes is how they are a slap in the face towards Nintendo and Sony yet all of Microsoft’s innovation is completely derivative of the work of these two companies. If Nintendo didn’t make casual gaming relevant than Microsoft wouldn’t care (ie. casual games = money = me too!), and hence no Xbox 360 “casual” line up. The Avatars are rips on Miis, the new interface is a blend of iTunes and the Cross Media Bar, Lips is basically Singstar rebranded and so on. It’s one thing to respectfully use others ideas, it’s another to use them and then show great disrespect, makes you look utterly transparent.

ShareThis

A new immersive web platform called Vivaty Scenes lets users create tiny virtual worlds and decorate them with content from around the internet.

After adding Vivaty Scenes, which entered public beta Tuesday, to a Facebook or AOL Instant Messenger account, users can set up a customizable "room" where they can host chat sessions or small virtual gatherings within a web browser.

The free service lets users pull content directly from some of the internet's most popular sites. Scenes' virtual televisions can be populated with any video from YouTube; virtual picture frames can be filled with any picture from a user's Photobucket, Flickr or Facebook accounts.

The product exists because people want more from the internet, and they don't want to download a separate application to hang out in a virtual world, according to Vivaty founder Keith McCurdy.

"We think people will care about [Vivaty Scenes] because it takes the everyday social networking and instant messaging experiences you already love, and transforms them into more expressive, visually engaging and fun experiences with your friends," said McCurdy.

Vivaty Scenes melds the easy customization that made MySpace popular with the 3-D graphics of Second Life. By hitching a ride on popular services like Facebook (with its 80 million users) and AIM, Vivaty has a potentially huge built-in user base. Still, it's just the latest in a long string of failed graphical multi-user environments designed to capture web users' imaginations.

"We have seen 3-D chat worlds with embedded web content come and go since the mid-1990s," said Ian Bogost, an assistant professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology. "The best way to access the internet's content as a user is to use the ordinary web. Why do I need to sit in a simulated world as a simulated character to watch a simulated PowerPoint? Why not just view the slides or video directly?"

Still, Vivaty's integration with popular social networking sites like Facebook gives it an advantage. And unlike large virtual worlds such as Second Life that require a lengthy client download and a powerful computer to run properly, Vivaty Scenes runs entirely within Internet Explorer.

"With Vivaty we have removed some key barriers consumers have had to overcome to get this type of an experience, meaning people can experience the depth and richness of a virtual world experience without a big download," McCurdy said.

The program currently only runs on Windows machines and in Internet Explorer, although Firefox and Mac versions of Scenes are planned for release at an unspecified later date.

Vivaty also plans to create branded versions of Scenes. Though McGurdy wouldn't reveal which firms his company has signed deals with, a bit of snooping turned up a branded version of the program in the Target and Coke Zero Virtual Dorm. The program within the branded version seems identical to Scenes, though a number of the objects in each virtual realm bear the companies' logos.

Those who follow the virtual world scene will recall Coca Cola's first foray into online realms: MyCoke. Though initially successful with their target "tween" demographic, the world quickly fell out of favor seemingly as a result of typical adolescent fad abandonment. By teaming with Vivaty, Coke can replicate that same kind of immersive product placement without having to dedicate tens of millions of dollars in development costs to create a world from scratch.

Users of Vivaty Scenes who are familiar with Second Life will see similarities between the two products. Everything from the graphics to the idea of embedding content in a 3-D world has been done previously in that famous virtual sandbox, which claims to have more than 14 million "residents."

Interaction in Vivaty Scenes is also strikingly similar to Second Life. Though characters move about via a series of game-like controls, movement is clunky and unintuitive. The controls work just well enough to move your virtual self around your Scene, but don't expect the sort of crisp controls you'd find in a true videogame.

Companies also might prefer working with Vivaty, McCurdy said, as his company's software gives partners "more direct control over how their brand is used."

That level of control, however, comes at the expense of removing player creativity. Once a player has selected an avatar and a Scene (whether it be a warehouse, a boat or a tropical patio), the extent of the customization options is severely limited. McCurdy has future plans to allow players to create their own objects, though currently users can only place, resize and recolor the furnishings within their Scene.

When asked about concerns from companies Vivaty is working with over possible objectionable content added to Scenes by users, McCurdy said the issue hasn't cropped up yet, "though the platform is flexible enough that our partners are able to create any sort of restrictions they would like."

"If a company wants to force every user to wear shirts with their logo on them, that's entirely possible," he said.

The idea does seem to intrigue Bogost, however.

"What would it really mean to make a compelling world that is mine," he said, "that says something about me and which, when I invite people into it, gives them a visceral sense of the inner workings of my thoughts, fears and fantasies?"

Images courtesy Vivaty

See Also:

• Second Life Bans Traditional Banking
• Congress Freaks Out Over Second Life Terrorism
• How Madison Avenue Is Wasting Millions on a Deserted Second Life
• Mutilated Furries, Flying Phalluses