I’ve been sending some stream-of-consciousness emails on video games to my friend who works at BBC’s The Culture Show in response to her request for info on trends and issues in the industry, and it’s all stuff that I’ve been meaning to post here, but hadn’t got around to yet, so I figured I’ll just post it in it’s unadulterated Gonzo form. Enjoy!
Going to E3 today, so I may not have 100% access to email for the next few days. Do you need info right away? I can just give you a quick rundown right now, or feel free to call me if you have any specific questions! So basically Nintendo came in last place in the last round of consoles (ps2 v. xbox v. gamecube) and has always been seen as the kiddiest, cutsiest of the manufacturers (targeting teenage boys and (gasp!) even girls instead of the 18-35 y.o. backwards-cap-and-sandal wearing white males that sony and nintendo have pursued)
When the previous generation of consoles came out, there was a huge jump in processor speed from the prior ones as manufacturers tried to bring them slightly more into line with the specs on desktop computers that people were using for gaming. Point being, when people saw the first screenshots and sample videos from the ps2 and xbox they were like “Wow! This is a *huge* improvement in graphics and etc!” and that pretty much was all it took to sell an ass-load of hardware.
This time around, the improvement in graphics and sound is still big, but is being percieved as more incremental, so people are like, “Ehh. It’s cool looking, but not that much better than the last generation.” Plus, the prices for this new round of consoles is higher than any past generation (with one notable exception that I’ll get to in a minute). In spite of this, they’re still “losing money” on selling these consoles, b/c they want to grab more market share and recoup on game and accessory sales.
Another thing that sony and ms have been trying to push, in order to justify the high price and etc. of their consoles is “better online support” i.e. the ps3 and xbox 360 have out-of-the-box support for internet play against other people and for online updates to games (i.e. if you buy dance dance revolution, and get sick of the songs that come with the game, you’ll be able to go online and buy new ones that will plug right into the existing game).
So annnnnnnyway, this has all been about sony and MS so far. Nintendo has taken a different path. At the last e3, they announced that their new system (code name: Revolution) would *not* be a huge improvement over the current generation in processor speed and etc, but that instead it would have a totally new interface and open up all kinds of new possibilities for games. They showed the controller, which as you can see in that video i posted looks like a tv remote and only has a few buttons. People were all pretty much “WTF?” at that point and sort of wrote Nintendo off as being “too innovative for their own good” (or less charitably, “just gimmicky”) The “gimmicky” factor probably owes a lot to the memories that gamers have of some really awful “experimental” controlers released for the original nintendo entertainment system back in the 80s and 90s i.e. The Power Glove, which was a glove that theoretically did motion tracking but totally sucked and the U-Force, which opened up like a laptop computer or a waffle iron and theoretically sensed the motion of your hands inside it’s “area”.
So that was where things were a year ago. Nintendo also brought out their latest hand-held system about that time the Nintendo DS (dual-screen) which got to market about 9 months before sony’s hand-held the PSP. Again, most people were like “The DS is too gimmicky with it’s two screens and it’s touch screen interface” but nintendo just kept promising “new and innovative game play”
This year, nintendo started delivering on some of the innovation they’ve been promising for awhile. On the DS, they came out with “Brain Age” which is a title aimed at (get this) 55+ y.o. people and incredibly enough, it was a huge hit (in japan) and is still gaining ground here. It’s supposed to encourage the maintenence and growth of brain cells by making the player perform a series of mentally challanging tasks. It’s been all over the press and is making inroads with consumers to the point that my *mom* asked me about it (this is like… unheard of in games) In japan they’ve already followed this up with a whole series of games for non-traditional markets called “Touch Generations”
Meanwhile at GDC (game developers conference) a few months ago, nintendo started pushing their new console. This came right on the heels of Microsofts launch of the xbox360 (for like $500) and sony’s announcement that the ps3 was going to be delayed until november). Myself and Grover were already pretty much sold on the whole thign, but a *lot* of people went in very skeptical and came out as true believers. Apparently a lot of this had to with Nintendo president Iwata’s keynote address which he delivered in phonetically memorized english, and I think he totally hypnotized people or something with his cadence because people came out of there totally hyped up on all things nintendo. The gist of his message was, “We will let microsoft and sony fight to the death, and we will pick up the pieces” Shortly thereafter Nintendo announced that the official title for their new console was “Wii” and again people were like “WTF?!” but they are still snowballing and picking up great press:
And they are going to bring this thing out for (rumored) something like $200-300 which is at least 150 under sony or MS. and their hand-held is absolutely *destroying* the PSP in japan and beating it pretty handily here in the us. so all in all, the year 2006 has been a great one for nintendo and we’ll see what happens post e3.
One mroe thing, about the controllers. I think this is a good metaphor for the attitudes of teh two companies. When Nintendo announced that their new controller was wireless and everything, people ridiculed it and said it was gimmicky. But they continued to support it and then pushed people’s buttons (no pun intended =) further by naming their console “Wii” which was kind of like “Screw you, we do what we want.” Meanwhile, Sony’s initial ps3 controller was all shiny and futuristic looking (it looked like a boomerang) and people were also pretty upset about it. So what did sony do? They retracted it and just this week announced that their new controler looks *exactly* like the ps2 controller did except they’ve added motion tracking, just like the Wii controller. D’oh!
As Iwata from Nintendo puts it (in that Time article):
“If you are simply listening to requests from the customer, you can satisfy their needs, but you can never surprise them. Sony and Microsoft make daily-necessity kinds of things. They have to listen to the needs of the customers and try to comply with their requests. That kind of approach has been deeply ingrained in their minds.”
Also worth reading is some stuff that Momus wrote last year about the Eye Toy (which is a video camera peripheral for the ps2, but the stuff in his articles could probably apply even moreso to the new Wii controller):
Trends & Issues–
I think the main one is still sex & violence in games. Politicians can’t resist taking shots at this one, and lately it’s gotten even more ridiculous. A study came out that correlated gaming with drug use:
And another game recently got the Grand Theft Auto “Hot Coffee” smack applied to it for allegedly having some unlockable female breasts:
So that’s a lot of hot air, but game companies are usually all too willing to bend over and censor themselves in pursuit of profit. Basically it just stems from the whole US Child Protectorate mind-set that “cartoons” and “games” are just for “kids” and so why would there EVER be sex or violence or etc. etc. etc. in there? Of course, the stuff I mailed you about earlier w/r/t Nintendo is interesting since they are actually trying to reach out to older folks and *demonstrate* to them directly that gaming is *not* all about blowing up naked girls.
Speaking of naked girls, this year at E3 they are cracking down on “Booth Babes”
in an attempt to improve their image, I’d imagine. We’ll see… =P
On a largely unrelated note there is a lot of talk recently about “Casual Games” which are usually small, puzzle-type games played on desktop computers. In most cases the way it works is that you download the first few levels for free, play it and if you like it you purchase the rest of the game online for about $20. These games have been a huge surprise hit among traditionally non-gaming audiences (i.e. women and older folks) and the major publishers are just now trying to figure out how to react. On the new Xbox 360 and the PS3 they are using the “internet connectivity” that I mentioned before to allow users to download casual-type games and pay for them right inside the system software. One huge hit already on the Xbox 360 has been “Geometry Wars”
Again I think this *all* ties into the trend of the major manufacturers/publishers having their blinders on and focusing so intently on the 18-35 y.o. males that they can’t see opportunities like this arising. (Although, they are certainly great at playing catch-up =)
The other HUGE trend right now is the development of Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs or just MMOs for short). The 9000 pound gorilla in this space is World of Warcraft with about 6 – 10 million subscribers each paying $15 / month to play. In response to this, the industry is now developing about 90 new MMOs simultaneously in a sort of fling feces at the wall and see what sticks approach:
In parallel to this there is a lot of talk about the “Item Based Model” for MMO economies (occasionally referred to as the “Korean Model” for where it is the most popular). In this version of things, the game itself is free and it’s free to play, but users can purchase items in the game for real money and in many cases they have been seen to spend way more per month this way than just paying the simple subscription fee. So now of course, everyone is moving in this direction too.
Another issue with MMOs is that of time vs. skill. My boss David Sirlin wrote a pretty heavily discussed article on this a few months ago:
Saying basically that games like Warcraft place too much emphasis on “grinding.” Meaning that by just putting in more hours than all the other players, you will rise through the ranks and get to the highest levels. So skill and practice is less of a factor than simply devoting all your time to the game, it would seem and isn’t this kind of sending kids the wrong message about how to get ahead in life? On the other hand, there’s people saying things like, “The team-based play in warcraft helps develop leadership skills and teamwork”
Addendum–
Also in the MMO space with subscription v. item-based economies you’ve got the issue of user-created content (e.g. secondlife) This is much, much broader than games b/c it gets into issues of myspace and youtube and copyright and net neutrality and etc. but if you want my opinion this is the biggest issue of all. people want to create, participate, DIY, punk & whatever and most traditional manufacturers, publishers, content aggregators are scared shitless over this. there will be a war over this for the next 5 – 15 years.
0 Responses to “Pre-E3 Brain Dump”