In Perspective - Nintendo

What you've heard

Nintendo has bowed out of next gen. After the horrible release of the Wii U, they followed up with “the year of Luigi” which focused on the 3DS, and now they have decided to skip E3 altogether. It’s clear they know they can’t “win” E3 and have given up on stealing the next gen thunder from Sony and Microsoft.

Except

You know in the good old days it was the mainstream media that would try and provide you with context and objectivity on a story like this, but now the drive to get sensational news out there as quickly as possible leaves that job to people like me. There are a few things you need to understand before you can truly evaluate Nintendo’s decision.

First, as I’ve already stated, the Wii U isn’t doing that bad unless you compare it to the Wii, the most successful console of all time. Compared to the Xbox 360, which had 3.7 to 3.9 million units sales at this point in its life, and the PS3, which was hovering around 3.2 million, the 3.45 million unit sales of the Wii U might come in well below the initial target of 4.5 million and even the revised target of 4.1 million, but they are hardly worth the doom and gloom they have been getting. More importantly, understand that Nintendo has been here before with the original DS, the 3DS, and the GameCube and has been able to turn it around with a strategy they have already stated they will be applying to the Wii U – first-party titles. They don’t need a press conference to speak to this; when Jr. wants the new Zelda game and it doesn't play on the system he owns, Mom goes out and buys the new one. Hype and anticipation are irrelevant in this market, and there isn’t anything that MS or Sony can bring to the table at E3 that’s going to have any effect on this market. In fact go ask your non-gamer friends what E3 is and you’ll be surprised to see that the holy grail of gaming, even with TV coverage, has about zero traction outside the “hardcore” crowd.

It’s also important to note that E3, without question the most expensive convention to attend and have the main stage at, had an attendance of around 43,000 in 2012. Compare that with CES’s draw of 150,000 or TGS with 230,000 attendants in 2012 and you start to wonder why E3 even gets the attention it gets, and if the money that is spent to be on a main stage there is worth it. Microsoft and Sony have new systems to show off, but without that who is to say what would have happened. Marketing budgets are being cut everywhere, so why not invest in the biggest bang for the buck?

So what’s the deal?

For years now, E3 has been the cash cow of gaming websites everywhere and the big question is who of the big 3 will “win”. For 4 solid years everyone has brought their game and used the stage to show why their system’s exclusives, features, and developers were the best going and why they would dominate the year to come. Stock prices would jump 5% or more the day after the conference for the “winner” and it's undeniable that the negative buzz to the “loser” had an impact as well. This year, Nintendo simply can’t win. Sony and Microsoft both have new systems coming out, and the budget and hype they will spend fighting each other will be on a level we haven’t seen in 8 years. The money Nintendo would have to spend just to step in the ring would be insane, and for what? To show us a new Zelda game, a new Smash Brothers, a new Mario Party, and a new Pokémon we all know are coming and are going to top sales charts regardless.

There is also this little thing called Nintendo Direct, which has been the focus of marketing dollars at Nintendo for almost a year now and has seen incredible results.

Nintendo made the right choice in bowing out. This doesn't mean they have given up and don’t have a plan to move the Wii U; it shows they HAVE a plan, and it’s a smart, well thought out one.

In Perspective - The Ouya

The Ouya

What you've heard

Open source, open license, moddable; these are meaningless words that I've been told are very good. Finally, we have a gaming system that puts all of these things into one package of buzzword awesomeness. With 10,000 developers already signed up and the second most successful Kickstarter in history, it’s time for the big three of gaming consoles to start running! Very soon Ouya is in your base, killing your market share.

Except

The Ouya seems like a great idea as long as you keep people talking about what it is; a gaming console that is easy for devs to modify, as a (mostly) open source OS, and is going to allow for more open publishing and distribution than either Google Play or the Apple app store. It becomes a lot less cool when you realize all of these things solve problems that don’t really exist. Is there really a base of developers somewhere who would be putting out fantastic games if not for the constricted publishing environments imposed by the current systems? The 10,000 developers who have signed on include mostly big names of established independent developers who are already doing just fine releasing games on the locked, un-rootable systems of today. It’s right about this point you realize that when the Ouya’s sales pitch says it will free developers from the things holding them back in the modern distribution model, they are talking about things like quality control and accountability. We already have free to play developers trying to scam people out of money with deceptive in-game purchases (often aimed at children), and it’s Google and Apple who have stepped up to prevent this type of behavior, going as far as to offer refunds to people fooled by the worst offenders. Ouya will have none of that, and have already stated they want to attract the free to play market.

So what’s the deal?

The Android gaming market is HUGE, and everyone wants a piece of it. Being able to work around Google Play is a godsend for smaller developers who want to make a $1000 budget game and try and sell it to 2000 people, and that type of market might be desirable on a local level. Hell, as a LARP owner the Ouya would be a great medium for releasing a LARP based game! It simply doesn't have the wide appeal everyone thinks it does, and will not have any impact on the current game market. It allows people to build a new type of game, but unfortunately that type of game is the low budget shitty game with no quality control.

But the real nail in the Ouya coffin is what it can’t do. It’s a gaming console running Jelly Bean (Android 4.1) on a 1.7 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9, or, put in non-technical terms, it’s a cell phone from early last year that you can’t take with you. Or use as a phone. Ars Technica and Slashdot have already had a crack it reviewing it and it’s not a good story; my Galaxy Note 2 phone outperforms this gaming console by almost 100% in some benchmarks and it’s slow by even the most generous standards when compared to $150 to $250 tablets. At $100 for the system and $50 for additional controllers, this system seems to attempt to fill the need people have for sitting at home playing the cheap games they bought on their phones...on the TV. Hands up everyone in the room that has that need?

Should be Playing - Bioshock: Infinite

I tried not to go with the obvious last week, but it has to be said: no gamer should miss Bioshock: Infinite.

(MILD SPOILERS OF THE FIRST 10 MINUTES OR SO)

Yes, the game play and gun play are fantastic. Yes, vigors (the “powers” in this game) are fun to use and make you feel very powerful. Yes, the graphics are insane. But that’s not why you should be playing it, and might even turn people who don’t like first person shooters off the experience. This would be a huge mistake.

From the moment you step out into the gates of Columbia for the first time, to a haunting rendition of “Oh Lord”, and are baptized (and nearly drown) before you are allowed to enter the city, you know this is going to be a powerful statement. By the time you win (by raffle) the opportunity to be the first to stone an interracial couple to death, it’s clear that statement isn’t going to be very comfortable. It only gets worse from there. You see, before TV and movies became the feel-good experiences they are, one of the main goals of art was to make us uncomfortable and question ourselves. It was soon discovered, however, you make a lot more money telling people they are awesome and everything is going to be ok, so we stopped doing that. Video games have become the only medium where it is still ok to shock and to confront the viewer with the true horror of the human experience, and this is something we all need from time to time. Bioshock not only guides us on that journey, it shows us why it is important in a girl named Elizabeth.

I could spend pages detailing how much of a leap forward in interactive art Elizabeth is, and others will in time. She isn’t a background character, an NPC, an escort mission, or even a companion; she is the main character in a wonderful and horrible story. It was Bungee who first understood what a leap forward in story telling this would be; they have also said that “Halo” is a game about an AI, not her protector, but never quite pulled it off. You see, in most games the idea of “player choice” is difficult to nail because you are the one affecting the whole of the universe, while being the center of it. The Mass Effect series is a great example. In Bioshock you are not the star, but you’re an important cast member. You react, and you get an opportunity to question the actions you are taking based on moral implications rather than outcome. I spent more time deciding if I should give Elizabeth a necklace with a bird on it, or one with a cage on it, than I did deciding which of my friends to send to their death in Mass Effect because the choice mattered more to me. I still don’t know what effect, if any, it had.

You need to play Bioshock not because it’s a great game (don’t get me wrong, it is) but because it’s a great, and truly accessible, work of art. You don’t have a lot of other options in that regard.

In perspective - LucasArts Closing

LucasArts Closing

What you heard

See, that's what happens when you release shitty games. Between Star Wars: Kinect, a generic first person shooter in 1313 and endless Lego games, LucasArts lost touch with their core fan base. It was only a matter of time until someone realizes there was no point keeping them around and to be honest, they got what they deserved.

Except

LucasArts has not had a financially unsuccessful game in about 20 years. Star Wars: Kinect, while having an average rating of 55 on Metacritic, topped sales charts for 3 weeks and spawned a limited edition $450 xBox. Clone Wars was the best selling Lego Star Wars game to date, despite it being the lowest rated.

So what's the deal?

I get it. You think because you hate Jar Jar Binks and Boba Fett you are a BETTER and more deserving Star Wars fan than the 12 year olds that watch Clone Wars today (even though you were around 12 when you first watched the originals and begged your Mom to buy you an Ewok toy). You need to get over the fact Star Wars is not FOR you anymore. Star Wars box office sales are around $4.2 billion total, but toy sales account for more than $12 billion. That's more than Movies, DVDs, and Video games COMBINED. Star Wars is marketed to children, and therefor Star Wars games need to be marketed to children, and the parents that buy these games don't care how well it's rated or even if it's any good. If it shuts junior up for a few days, it was well worth the money.

The problem isn't that LucasArts isn't able to push product and make successful games, it's that the two most profitable Star Wars games ... FOR LUCASARTS ... in the last 5 years are SW:TOR and Star Wars Angry Birds. The observant among you might note that LucasArts did not spent one single minute or dollar on developing either of these games. They were licensed products developed by other established teams. And that's all Disney sees. Why spend millions of dollars a year on a studio when we can just charge other developers to slap a Star Wars sticker on their game?

So if you thought Star Wars: Kinect was bad, just wait and see what comes out now that the license is for sale without accountability. The EA Sports Star Wars series including Star Wars Golf, the Star Wars facebook game where you play a moisture farmer, Real Petz: Bantha ... ok wait, I would totally buy that one but you get my point.

Should be Playing - Costume Quest

Costume Quest is a rare gem of a game. It’s simple, just addictive enough, and just long enough to allow for attachment without overstaying its welcome. You play as a young boy or girl attempting to rescue your brother or sister from the monster that kidnapped him or her on Halloween. You fight using costumes you construct using a variety of items scavenged around maps, with classics like paper tube swords and tin foil robots. Every fight begins with a wonderfully charming transformation sequence, and the combat itself has a surprising amount of depth without getting overwhelming or distracting from what the game is trying to be: a mindless diversion. There are collectibles if that’s your sort of thing, and an upgrade and level system to give a light RPG feel.

Although not voice acted, the script tries to be light hearted, campy, and funny, and it hits more often than it misses. It has the feel of the old Animaniacs TV show; that perfect balance between kids humour and adult undertones. It’s not laugh out loud funny, but that’s a good thing; even the humour of the game backs off before you take it too seriously.

As someone who plays games as art and generally over-analyzes things, it’s great to have a game you can just play though like a child playing with a ball on a string, even though I generally hate anything casual. The fact that I liked this game at all speaks to just how much it needed to get right. It’s often on Steam for 75% off, and the next time this happens I would encourage you to pick it up.

In Perspective: Violence in Video Games

Violence in Video Games

What you've heard

You want to know why the world is going to the non-denominational negative afterlife? Video games. Today’s games are a showcase of ultraviolence that not only desensitises children to violence, it promotes violent fantasies. Kids today play these games and emulate what they see in the real world, resulting in the violent mass killings that are becoming all too commonplace in the world today. Lower violence in video games, lower violence in real life.

Except

First and foremost, kids don’t play violent games. For the 3rd year in a row, the FTC found that M rated video games are the hardest age-inappropriate product to buy, from a list that includes movie tickets, DVDs, books, and CDs, with a shocking 87% compliance rate. There are studies by child protection groups showing that buying an M rated video game as a minor is harder than buying cigarettes and alcohol. Both the Xbox and the Wii lock out M-rated games for children if the parents take 30 seconds to set up parental controls, a step that receives free tech support from both companies, and most major retailers will offer to set up professionally for a fee (around $40). The Xbox allows you to monitor your Xbox usage and what games are being played with real time alerts to your computer, while the Wii allows this feature on the console itself (minus the real time alerts). If a child is playing an M-rated game it is the result of a parent who honestly doesn’t give a damn, and that’s likely bringing its own set of problems to the table.

It’s also important to note that the average age of a mass shooter in the US over the last 10 years is 35, so if childhood video games are to blame we need to take a long hard look at exactly what about “Super Mario Brothers 3”, “Dr. Mario”, “Final Fantasy”, “Commander Keen”, “Ultima VI: The False Prophet” and “Wing Commander” is causing these people to lose it, because that’s what they would have been playing as children.

So what’s the deal?

We (North American society) suffer from child worship. It is the social dysfunction that defines our generation and what history classes will be teaching as the fall of western civilization 50 years from now. Simply saying something could be harmful to children is the most effective way to get whatever the hell unreasonable agenda you want pushed into legitimacy, and it works with unprecedented success. The conservative party in Canada recently tried to say we, as a country, should not consider ending discrimination on an estimated 350,000 transgendered Canadians because a child might see a dong in the rest room. I really wish I was making that up, but I’m simply not that creative! It successfully derailed almost a year of debate on what should have been a meaningful and important reflection on our cultural identity to one side saying “we should probably protect the rights of all people, and find a way to preserve our values while moving forward in a changing world” and the other screaming back “YOU WANT TO LET PEOPLE RAPE CHILDREN”.

The US government knows that violence in video games isn’t doing any harm. They have studies going back to the 1700s, when they were first asked to research if provocative dancing led to provocative behaviour. They have gone though the whole violence thing with theatre, books, radio, music and TV already and they already know the answer: there is no correlation. There is a huge vested interest in keeping fear alive however, and no one wants to give up this incredible tool for pushing the envelope on control. Now that the government has seen they can get people to sign away basic rights and freedoms (and give them millions of dollars) just by saying the welfare of children is at stake, they are never going to give that up. How bad is it? Just like gun control the CDC (Center for Disease Control) is under direct orders NEVER to research this subject directly or officially rather than risk an official report saying all this fear mongering is pointless.

More so, if you wondering why video games are so damn good at keeping children from playing them, check out the cost of getting a game rated by the ESRB, multiply by the number of games that come out a year, and quickly realise that they are making more money off video games then most publishers and pretty much every developer. They have plenty to spend on enforcement and education and have a vested interest in doing so. They also have a vested interest in making sure you feel that ESRB rating are essential, and should a child ever pick up a M-rated game he will immediately bash his mother’s skull in with it ... it’s HOW THEY MAKE (a stupidly large amount of) MONEY.

Still not convinced? Let’s head over to Japan. Not literally, that costs a lot of money. I’m just going to talk about Japan. You might have noticed that Xbox has fantastic parental controls while Sony has exactly zero, with Nintendo in-between. That’s not neglect on the part of Sony, it’s Microsoft and Sony reacting to their clients. Japan doesn’t suffer from the same child worship we do, so no one is crying to protect the children from the horrors of video games. Sony PS, while a popular system in the US and EU, is without question marketed for Japan where such features are simply not desired. For Nintendo, which is more of an even split between the two markets, the parental controls are tacked on for sale outside of Japan. So how is Japan’s horrible neglect of its children playing out? Well let’s compare the number of US mass shooting deaths last year to the number in Japan last year and get you a percentage...

Oh I can’t do that. Divide by zero error. Last 5 years. No? Ten?

Oh here we go ... 8 people were killed in 2001 in a mass sho ... HE USED A KNIFE? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?

I’m out.