May 2008 Archives

The need for physical media in gaming was a nearly universal truth up until a few years ago... when things got all hot and steamy.  In 2003, Valve (the studio best known for Half Life and Portal) decided to turn out a system known as Steam - a distribution platform for games that my friend Bart has quite accurately dubbed the "iTunes of Gaming".  By leveraging the ever increasing capabilities of high speed internet and the ever cheapening (great word) cost of hard drive space, Steam essentially thought outside the box by completely getting rid of it.  Just like iTunes, Steam allows users to purchase games online, download them directly to their computer, and play them without the need for physical media or contact with other members of the human race.  Steam also has a couple of other nice perks, like being persistent through multiple computers (its all online), helping to reduce software piracy, making recovery far easier and more reliable, reducing distribution costs for game producers, some pretty slick tracking tools, an Xbox achievement-like system for PC games and reducing the environmental impact of game production.  And of course, no more  of those hella annoying disk read errors.  You know the kind - you have too many adult beverages and decide that you are a worthy DJ after practicing your turntable scratching skills on an old copy of Tomb Raider.  Anyone?  Anyone?  Ok then... lets pretend that never happened.

The biggest problem with Steam when it was launched was that it was proprietary.  It was a means of pushing out Valve's games, which, while nice, meant that if you were playing anything but Half Life, you were still buying CDs/DVDs.   That, thankfully, is slowly changing.  Valve has been pushing Steam as an overarching platform, a standard for digital video game distribution.  As of now, they have signed 12 other publishers on to Steam distribution, pushing out more than 200 different games digitally.

One of our hopes within the EGC is that Steam might help to alleviate the daunting task of physical media distribution in a University computer lab.  After all, physical disks are a physical liability, and so a system like Steam could have enormous potential to make our lives easier as the EGC Lab becomes a reality here at Penn State.  Did I mention it self patches too?

Now on to a totally different topic for a moment.  Saving your game, something of a must if you play games, is another interesting challenge for the EGC.  For obvious reasons, Penn State secures lab computers in such a way that not all parts of the hard drive are accessible to your average user, and much of the space that can be written to is essentially temp space - cleaned away as soon as the user logs out.  This presents an interesting challenge if someone would like to save their game. Or perhaps more interestingly, if an instructor wants students to begin their game from a pre-set save point, how would students access it.  We have some interesting ideas on how to accomplish this, particularly one by our colleague Jonathan Holman, but we have yet to come up with anything perfect.

Now seemingly, I've presented two very different ideas.  What exactly does digital game distribution have to do with save cabs in a Penn State computer lab?  Oh am I glad you asked.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I introduce to you Valve's Steam Cloud - a new addition to Steam which will allow users to store save games and game configuration settings online, free of charge.

On a small scale, this might not seem all that significant.  After all, most PC gamers tend to have a dedicated machine anyway, so online storage is largely a jazzed up recovery mechanism.  But if you look beyond the conventional, to say, gaming cafes (big in Asia) or... I don't know... University wide gaming initiatives looking for good solutions to save games... *cough* this is a big deal.

Its unclear whether or not Steam Cloud will allow gamers to share save points with other users (think Faculty pushing certain saves to a class) but that is child play now that the foundation has been laid.

I've never been so happy to see a cloudy day. 



Image from f7sound.com

Over the past few days, I've found myself having an inordinate number of conversations about (brace yourself) books.  Much to the surprise of at least one of my colleagues, I can read, and occasionally do.  Though I don't like to let that out of the bag too often - it makes me look bad when people think I do anything other than play video games 24/7 ;-)

It started off with a book my Fiance was reading about buzz marketing - the aptly titled BuzzMarketing - which created a <makes Dr. Evil face> buzz... around the house.  <Mad scientist laugh>.  Then it was Daniel Pink's A Whole New Mind - a fantastic book that I came to find out several other colleagues of mine were also reading.  Then Cole turned me on to Everything is Miscellaneous, a relatively new book by David Weinberger - one of the authors of infamous Clutrain Manifesto.  And now I'm onto to my newest literary conquest, Grand Theft Childhood.

As you could probably guess from the titles, these are all professionally themed books - books that follow ideas about the changing nature of our world and the way we interact, think, learn and succeed in it.  They are the kind of books that have the potential to change the way, particularly those of us in education, do business.  And as I'm slowly coming to realize, quite a few of us our reading them and having the moments of enlightenment that they bring.  But we're all doing it alone.

So after talking to Cole, an idea emerged.  In the spirit of community that we're always talking about, why not start a professional book club of sorts.  The idea being that we can create a place where those of us who are reading these forward thinking books can come together and build a forward thinking future out of them - bounce ideas off each other, share ways that what we've read could impact what we do, and generally improve life on this planet by at least three fold.  Not only that, but what with the group being more than the sum of its parts and all, we can also expose ourselves to books or ideas that we might never have thought about on our own.  The only constraint?  Books that don't make you think need not apply.

Does anyone else like this idea enough to want to participate if we got a group like this going?  I most certainly welcome thoughts.  And if a few folks are down, we can turn this into reality.

One of the obvious risks of being candid is that you will one day walk yourself into a hellishly awkward "wrong side of the rake" booby trap situation, circa Side Show Bob.  But if I was set on playing it safe, then I probably wouldnt have a blog in the first place.  So, when in Rome...

Sex. Despite the fact that our society flaunts it just about everywhere, sex tends to be a relatively private part of the human psyche. One that we don't often share with those outside of our closest circles, if anyone at all.  So as you can imagine, sex in video games tends to be one of those subsets of game discussion that often gets left on the shelf.  Not only is this because nothing makes people uncomfortable faster than talking about pixelated acts of loving.  Its also because, lets face it, the stereotypical gamer isnt exactly an Adonis.  And if you picture the cast of "Nerds" playing Leisure Suit Larry it leads to this uncomfortable mix of terror and pity.  <shudders>

But when you get right down to it, there is a lot more to it than that.  Such as, you might ask?  And what in the world is Stub doing looking for sexual content in his video games anyway?  Both are good questions.  And for the answers, I'll refer you to Daniel Floyd, and an unconventional lecture from his Media Theory class at the Savannah College of Art and Design.  Oh and just FYI, Daniel is an advanced degree student... hmmm....

 
 


Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and I figured, what the heck, why not travel both?

1)  In general, I find sexuality in video games a bit ... silly, for lack of a better word.  Up until recently, sex in games has tended to be used lowest common denominator style.  And when you play that card, best cast its tasteless.  Worst case its demeaning or offensive, and as Floyd put so nicely, it does nothing to help the fledgling medium earn more respect from its critics.

I posted a question many moons ago, about why character development in video games is so ineffective at creating an emotional impact with a player in the way other mediums do.   I alluded to that fact that "choice" could help in this, but why not extend the idea a bit.  If relationships are a problem with game characters, why not focus on the relationships themselves.  In most games, characters are hollow, shallow, one sided and emotionally undeveloped as compared to characters in film or literature.  The result is a persona that is very difficult to empathize with, very difficult to care about, and ultimately lacking in its representation of humanity.  The old adage says sex complicates things...perhaps thats just the ticket for characters that need a little more depth.  I'm not talking about pornography mind you - but sexuality.  Some representation that these characters we play, like movie or novel characters, are multifaceted - more like us than they are like stone cold superheros. 

There are only a select few games out that have set out to tackle sexual relationships tastefully  - Mass Effect and GTA4 are two that come to mind.  And in both cases, there is a noticeable richness, an added depth to the characters involved.  They are "more human", and that humanity pays dividends in terms of the narrative, character complexity, empathy, and their ability to capture the human condition. 



2)  Now that you are undoubtedly looking for excuses not to associate with me anymore (honestly, sometimes I don't even know where I come up with this stuff), lets switch gears a bit . The inspiration for Floyd's lecture delivery is a web based, game critic series known as Zero Punctuation.  ZP is an incredibly crude, yet thoughtful and hilarious blend of cynicism and poorly drawn cartoons that comes together to make magic.  I'd recommend checking it out - but be warned, its usually pretty inappropriate. 

What I love most about Zero Punctuation is the way it distinguishes itself from the field.  Very rarely do I read game reviews.  Its not that I don't care, but rather that most game reviews just arent compelling.   Put another way, I don't consider them interesting, and even the most well written reviews are rarely entertaining.  "Are you not entertained?!"  (end obligatory Gladiator quote).  Zero Punctuation, by contrast, is able to accomplish the same function as a multi-page game review, but in a, 4 minute long video.  Whats more, the series has come to succeed where more traditional reviews fail - it is engaging.  Engaging to the point that not only do I watch every review, but I have sought out and consumed every back reviews and am all too aware that a new week brings a new review (hurray Wednesday!).  And don't go getting all sappy and nostalgic about the heyday of the newspaper editorial.  Ink makes Stub's hands sad. 

Through its unique blend of intelligent crassness and quick cut, attention consuming delivery, Zero Punctuation is addicting.  It doesnt show game clips.  It isnt PC.  And in an age of ultra-twitch media consumption, it won't even use a period (which, being a giant grammatical failure myself, makes him my hero).  Zero Punctuation isnt good because creator Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw is the best game reviewer on the planet.  Its good because its different - because it steps outside the box and scratches people where they itch.  And yes I am well aware of the irony in praising a twitch show while I write a blog that is wordier than a Herman Melville novel.

The format is not one I would have thought would work in an educational context, largely because up until yesterday, I had not taken the time to think critically about separating the delivery from the parental advisory sticker.  But after seeing Floyd's lecture I can see the light.  Look back over some the reasons I don't read game reviews.  Not entertaining.  Not interesting.  Not compelling.  Not engaging.  Well that sounds like a familiar problem, doesnt it?  

Floyd's presentation has, in less than two days, gotten almost 50,000 hits on YouTube.  50,000 people who have willingly sought out, and viewed of their own accord, a lecture.  It doesnt look like a class.  It doesnt sound like a class.  But that video is 10 minutes of edumication.  And it didnt need to load up on profanity and sexual jokes to sell.  Entertaining delivery meets digital distribution and boom.

Obviously this sort of format would not be well suited for Advanced Sub Molecular Microbiology, but I get that woo woo woo feeling when I think about Zero Punctuation style Humanities classes.  Does the fundamental content change?  It doesnt need to.  As with so many things in life, its not what you say, but how you say it.  And videos like this one say things in a way that connects with people, or at least makes them want to tune in next week.

So should every instructor run out run out and revamp their courses in this mold?  Most certainly not.  Even if a subject translates well to this sort of quick hitting presentation, its reasonably high touch, and without the right blend of humor and substance, it would flop miserably.  But I wanted to present it as an example of how "different" can really hit a home run, and the kind of unconventional teaching techniques that get me excited to come to work in the morning.  And it goes without saying its a great use of digital media.

So what says you?  Would Zero Punctuation Herman Melville be more or less tolerable for you?  Well... I suppose your right.  Meville is never tolerable ;-)  Regardless, I'm curious about your thoughts. 



Images from wikipedia.com and overcaffeinated.net

DISCLAIMER: This is a politically charged post, being made in a blog typically reserved for other topics.  If political opinions do not interest you, please skip this post.


I don't like to get into politics in this space. Quite frankly, getting people to buy into the notions like "video games might be worth something" is difficult enough without introducing an additional polarizing factor like politics into the mix. Thats not to say I don't have my own opinions on the governance of this country, but its not something I like to push upon onto people unless prompted. But tonight I can't sleep thanks to a line that was crossed earlier today by a prominent politician, and so I have come to my place of reflection to speak my mind. Feel no obligation to continue reading if you came here looking for the typical fare this blog has to offer.

Though I have been an Obama supporter during this Presidential campaign, I most certainly respect the efforts of Senator Clinton. Truth be told, were it any other election but this one, I would likely have happily supported her. I disagree with some of the tactical decisions she has made during this primary season, but by and large I think she would have made an excellent Democratic nominee in a year without Barack Obama. But of late, I've developed a mounting frustration with the Clinton campaign. Attempting to perpetually change the conditions on which victory is determined, flip flopping on the seating of the Florida and Michigan, her utterly disrespectful "memory" of taking gunfire in Bosnia, and her racially charged statements about the control she maintains over the working class white voters have, quite frankly, left a bad taste in my mouth. Now I'm a reasonable person. I understand that every candidate, including the one of my personal preference, has made mistakes during the campaign. We all say things we wish we could take back, and I for one don't like to deitize politicians out of their human right to imperfection.

But earlier today, making a mistake came off the table. When asked by a local newspaper why she was continuing to campaign despite concerns about party unity, her response was:

"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it."

Later in the day, Senator Clinton offered this clarification on her remarks - I won't call it an apology.


Most people don't know it to look at me, but I'm half African American.  Its not something I make a big deal about, because frankly, it doesnt matter to me.  I was fortunate beyond measure to be raised in an environment in which diversity was not something that needed to be discussed or explained or thought about - it just way.  But as is the case with all kids, I grew up, and came to realize that the rest of the world wasnt nearly as accepting of differences as they were in Mrs. Summer' Kindergarten class. Racial discrimination is something I have experienced a scare few times in my life.   It doesnt take very many times to understand it. I most certainly do not support Senator Obama exclusively because he is black, but I very much appreciate the historic significance of an African American President.

There are, I'm very sorry to say, still a lot of ignorant people in this world, and in this country.  Intolerant people who would and do judge people because of the color of their skin, gender, religious affiliation or sexual preferences.  And some of these people are hateful enough as to commit horrible crimes in the name of their perverted close mindedness. 

And so here we are today, 2008, with a very good chance that a Black man will be elected President of the United States of America.  And unless you've been living in a sheltered box your entire life, you are just as aware of the presence of those crazy, hateful, intolerant people as I am.  And if you are anything like me, or my family, or the people I know, you worry about it.

I know very well what Senator Clinton meant to say.  At least I know what I hope she meant to say.  You never know what can happen - it ain't over until its over.  But that message is a whole lot different than the one she laid out today, stirring up an unthinkably horrible possibility in the dawn of a social coming of age of this nation.

To dare to even insinuate that your campaign remains active JUST IN CASE something like an assassinate occurs is deplorable beyond words and shameful beyond reprehension.  What sort of motivating factor is that to remain in the running for president?  What does that say about you if thats all you have left when asked why you continue to run?  What kind of person must you be to even consider such a thing privately, nevermind in front of a news outlet, knowing that there might just be someone sick enough to commit such an act?  And knowing that any thoughtful American who has experienced any form of intolerance much less lived through a previous political assassination  already harbors this unspoken fear, how could you dare play that card? Then to offer  something less than an unequivocal apology is unimaginable. 

I am as disgusted today as I have ever been in a public official... and thats after I give Senator Clinton the benefit of the doubt.  It is time for the undecided super-delegates and the democratic national committee to end this primary, since we see what Senator Clinton views as end game.  Party unity indeed...

I'll leave you with a video of the Special Comments from Countdown with Keith Olbermann and a quote from said video of particular relevance.

"And to not appreciate immediatly, to still not apprciate tonight,just what you have done today is to reveal an incomprehension about the America you seek to lead.  This Senator is too much.  Because a senator, a politician, a person who can, let hang in midair, the prospect that she might just be sticking around, in part, just in case the other guy gets shot, has no business being, and no capacity to be, The President of the United States".

A few weeks ago, we (being the members of the Educational Gaming Commons) were fortunate enough to meet with several faculty members from the Penn State music department.  The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the possible educational impact of games like Rock Band or Guitar Hero on music education, and was in my opinion, very enlightening.  If you ever played one of these games for any length of time, you would probably agree that there is some potential in such an idea.  But that doesnt mean its a perfect one, and one of the important outcomes of our meeting was a candid discussion about some of the educational shortcomings of these extraordinarily popular music games.

Perhaps the most significant one of these shortcomings is that while you can play whatever music is in the jukebox, you are still limited to the music in the jukebox.  Or put another way, you only get to play what the developers of Rock Band and Guitar Hero say you can play.  And while we all love Blink 182 (or not) there is a whole lot of music, entire genres of music, out there that these games will never touch.  And as you can imagine, thats a major limiting factor in any attempt to bring these commercial explosions to the music classroom.

At least it was, up until yesterday.

Enter the press release for the next in line for the Guitar Hero franchise, Guitar Hero World Tour, and a new feature that blows the lid off pot:  Music Studio.  If the name doesnt give it away, Music Studio lets you the player create your own original music using any of the Guitar Hero instruments, upload it to GHTunes (a user generated music repository), and share it with anyone else in the guitar hero community.  Self created tracks cant contain vocals, likely for copyright reasons, but regardless, this was supposed to be years away.  And so many doors are opening I can scarcely see them all. 

• Music composition for the masses - lowering the barrier to music entry and compositional understanding
  
• Independent music distribution and exposure to a massive community
  
• Unlimited content that is bottom up instead of top down
• Potential to expand Guitar Hero into every genre of music other than Rock & Roll
• Ending world hunger
  

This, ladies and gentlemen, is what I like to call a game changer (puntastic!).  The educational possibilities are huge.  The impact on music is huge.  The community aspect is huge.  And you better believe Guitar Hero World Tour's sales figures will be huge.

There is no need to beat this point to death like I normally do as I think it pretty much speaks for itself.  But this is a big deal.  And I for one, can't wait for our next meeting with the music faculty.



UPDATE:
The tentative release date for Rock Band World Tour is October 14, 2008 - price $189.99




Image from kotau.com

As I may or may not have mentioned in this space before, I have a thing for marketing.  "A thing" is probably a little too vague - it was almost my career path of choice before technology stormed in and wooed me with its mariachi band of love.  I don't think I have a particular talent for it or anything like that, but I've always been enamored by the creativity that the industry attracts/ breeds.  Perhaps in a future life, I'll dabble in the art. 

Anyway, with this as a background, I'm sure it will come as no surprise that video game advertising is a facet of the profession that I find particularly interesting.  Not just how video games are marketed, but also the budding "in game advertising" field (advertisements within a video game), which some expect to be a $2 billion business by 2010.  Need an example?  See if you can figure out who is a major sponsor of the pro basketball game NBA 2K8.  Subtle, eh?

There have been a few in game advertising  stories that have caught my eye of late, and what better place to  talk about them than right here. Vamos!

Bogost Talks Game Advertising
I never cease to be amazed with the understated thoughtfulness in which Ian Bogost writes, and one of his newest posts most certainly lives up to par.  A quote to wet your whistle:

"This untapped potential of games upsets the very foundation of advertising as we know it. Instead of surrounding us with images that reflect lives unlived, games can allow us to try out hypothetical lives with new products, people and ideas. To realise this potential, advertisers of both goods and viewpoints must stop blindly inserting their billboards into games or creating feeble copies of the cornerstones of videogame pop culture. Instead, they must start simulating the products, public policy positions, charitable interventions and other worldly ideas in new games – games worthy of our attention."

As usual, I agree with Bogost to a point in so much as I think advertisers need to start thinking critically about how to effectively utilize games as a means to push product instead of just putting old methods in a new medium.  But there is also a certain degree of pragmatism that needs to be approached if you are talking about a  much more meaningful, substantive advertising message in games.  Do we want advertisers sitting down with game designers from day 1 of the design process?  I don't mind, and in fact enjoy game designers using the medium as a form of expression if done well (Metal Gear, Call of Duty 4, Mass Effect, Bioshock) but I'm not sure how happy I would be if I know that expression was done to satiate advertisers.

Solid Snake Rocks the iPod
Apparently, Solid Snake, the main character in the upcoming blockbuster Metal Gear Sold 4, will have his very own, in game iPod, which will allow him to change background music... or something.
    Personally, I don't think this example of product placement is going to help sell more iPods (everyone owns them) or help with brand recognition (everyone knows how they work).  I'm actually going to take things in reverse - that Metal Gear is hoping to borrow from the familiar to enhance design elements within their game.  Or put another way, the iPod isnt using Metal Gear, Metal Gear is using the iPod.  I won't claim that to be the truth - just a possibility, and I'm sure regardless of which way the wind blew, Konami was well compensated for their use of the top selling MP3 player. 

Since as far back as I can remember, I've been a Star Wars fan.  I *think* my Mom told me once that I saw Return of the Jedi in theaters during its original release back in 1983 (though I was all of 1 at the time), and I am confident that said experience is responsible for most of the good things that have happened in my life.  Or at least responsible for the fact that I refuse to remain grounded in reality ;-)  I've owned somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 versions of the original trilogy, which never seemed that unusual until I took the time to write it out just now.  Awkward moment.  And so with that as background, I'm sure it will come as no surprise to you that I consume Star Wars based video games like a madman.

The newest addition to the Star Wars gaming empire, "The Force Unleashed" is set for release in September of this year.  And in a word, it looks "out-of-control-awesome", excessive hyphenation not withstanding.  Seriously, just look at this concept art (which is not a far-cry from the actual gameplay footage I've seen).  Hard 2 tha core.



But while I could happily ramble on for days about Force Unleashed, there is a point to bringing this up beyond the sweetness factor of the game.  Lucas Arts, the studio who produces Star Wars games, has always been a player in the PC realm.  Their list of produced titles for the PC is literally about 4 times longer than for any other platform, and for the longest time, Lucas Arts and the PC were like bread and butter.  A big budget game from one would assuredly mean a release on the other.  But given enough time, the winds of change will always blow, and it appears that time may have come.

The Force Unleashed, which is arguably one of the most highly anticipated Star Wars games ever made, will not be released for the PC.  Why, you might ask?  To find the answer, you need go no further than the words of the game's producer, Cameron Suey by way of an interview with videogamer.com.

"Someone with a $4,000 high-end system would definitely be able to play the Euphoria, the DMM and really technical elements of the game. But someone with a low-end PC would have a watered down experience, they would have to turn all the settings down and it wouldn't be the same game. On the other hand if we made that game for as many people as possible, because we are trying to make mass market games, something that everybody can enjoy, well then it's not taking advantage of what those $4,000 systems can do."

Most interesting.  A major developer backing away from the PC in favor of mass market appeal?  Are we reopening the conversation about the death of computer based gaming?  Though Suey does go on to point out that such a statement is not a swearing off of the PC by Lucas Arts, it does raise some eyebrows.

To be fair, the death of PC Gaming notion is one that has been going on for years - since the release of the next gen consoles, if not before.   But despite Suey's claim that PCs are still viable, actions speak louder than words, and cash money speaks with a megaphone.  Take a look at this chart from ARS Technica:

And these overall industry sales are low compared to others I've seen.  The NPD group, a major market research firm has slightly different numbers, but the same general outcome -  PC gaming dollars showing a 15% drop off since 2006. The gaming pie keeps getting bigger, and the PC slice keeps getting smaller and smaller.   Now we have a major developer  dropping computer development for a major title in favor  of a broader market - the console market. 

So whats the deal?  Whats wrong with the desktop computer?  A few thing says I.

• Loosing the Arms Race.  Mr. Suey is dead on and is describing what I like to call the arms race theory of PC gaming.  Game designers are constantly pushing the envelope as to what a game engine can do.  Thats great for tech shows, but terrible for the average consumer because it turns PC gamers into obsessive masochists.  There is always SOMETHING you can do to make your game look better, and that something involves spending money to upgrade this that or the other.  And no matter how you spend, you can never "win", because in 6 months your high priced components will be in the bargain bin at Best Buy and Moore's Law will be laughing at you. OR you can just buy a console for several hundred bucks, and play easy knowing that your games will look as good as they were intended to look. And because of the ever increasing costs of gaming, decisions need to be made. 
  

• Power - Game consoles are getting more and more powerful.  At one point, the PC was the undisputed king of the ring and if you wanted a heavy hitting title, it had to reside in a desktop.  But consoles have a come a long way since the Nintendo, to the point where they are now driving the innovation that was once a PC exclusive (see the Playstation 3's cell processor). The good old tower still has the edge for the highest of high performance, but the gap is far smaller than it used to be and it is getting to where the difference isnt worth the cost. 
  

• Interfaces.  A few years ago, you wouldnt dream of playing a first person shooter game on a console.  Why?  Because without your trusty mouse, you'd be dead long before could aim at anything.  But as the controller has evolved and as people have become more comfortable using them, that stigma has started to slip away.  Don't believe me?  Go compare console vs PC sales of Call of Duty 4 (a franchise that began as a PC exclusive in 2003).  There are still a few things consoles don't do as well, namely intricate micromanagement games (like real time strategy or MMOs), but even that is starting to change.
  

• Society and the Interweb.  My Fiance does not like it when I play computer games.  And though shes is not too fond of Xbox games either, the Xbox is a tolerable evil. Why?  The computer is in the study, and our study, like most people's, is not really a hangout spot in the house.  The Xbox meanwhile, is in the living room, hooked up to the greatest invention in relationship history - the splitscreen television.  
       At one point, PC gaming was the only way you could game and be social at the same time because it was the only device that could connect to the internet.  But times they are a changing, and features like text chat, voice chat, and online play are now as accessible to the console world as the PC. And with services like Xbox Live and the PSN, consoles may in fact be MORE social than standard computers.
  

What does it all mean?  Maybe nothing.  Maybe PC gaming is fine.  Maybe declining sales numbers and blockbuster title independence is just a coincidence.  And maybe the writing on the wall is starting to get a bit easier to read.  Though the bigger impact, if any, is something I'll likely need to spend a bit of time thinking about.   But we might be seeing the coming of "the console as the center of the living room" dream that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have been stressing.  The computer as a tool for work - the console as the tool for everything else.  Hmmm.   

May the force be with you, PC gaming.  It looks like you're going to need it.





Images from uk.gizmodo.com and arstechnica.com
  

One of the side effects of taking a strong interest in this years Presidential election is that I've become very well acquainted with MSNBC (both on television and the interwebs) - my personal choice for political coverage.  There are a number of reasons for this, two of which include Chuck Todd's awesomeness and the fact that I can't stand hearing "the best political team on television" from the CNN folks every 15 seconds.  But none of those reasons, interestingly enough, had anything to do with technology.

So it has come as a somewhat unexpected surprise to find out that a network I prefer for totally unrelated reasons is also putting their hand in the same cookie jar I delve into for this blog.  Metaphorically speaking.  I think.

It all started a few months back when MSNBC offered up a subtle but very interesting feature to their website - the ability to easily embed their video footage in your blog.  The concept, which has become commonplace thanks to services like Youtube, is not revolutionary.  What makes it noteworthy is that its coming from a major news outlet, and signals what I hope to be an exciting change in the mentality of the powers that be.  Obviously that is an overly altruistic mentality - news organizations, like any business, are out to make money.  You don't need to be a Fortune 500 CEO to understand that this move is about building loyalty among a young (relatively speaking), digitally fluent audience who makes up a large chunk of MSNBC's demographic.   But regardless of the motivation,  it is a welcome addition that makes it easy to discuss important issues in whatever personal venue someone might feel comfortable.  And for a little example, ZOMG DEADLIEST CATCH IS MAKING A VIDEO GAME.  I'm a smidge concerned about its quality (year and a half dev time?), but you better believe I'm going to rent it =)
 

Now embeddable video is nice and all, but news is still news.  More often than not its dry.  Its bland.  And even with the addition of digital media, its not like its fun... not like its a game or something. Oh fiddlesticks...

And with that beautiful use of the word fiddlesticks, dear friends, I bring you the MSNBC Arcade - and with it, an opportunity to make a game of the latest headlines.  Currently, there are only two games in the arcade.  Newsbreaker has been out for probably about a year, and is essentially Pong.  NewsBlaster, which was recently released is just like one of those match the color, Tetris style puzzlers that I can't remember the name of.  Both games are easy, casual, quick hitters that work by a very simple principle of "liberating" news headlines as you play.  The headlines you earn are then stored in a little sidebar.  If a headline looks interesting, just roll over it, click it, and it will pause your game and open the story in a new window.  Here is a shot of Newsblaster in case words make you uncomfortable and nervous.
 
Hmm.  Digital media.  Check.  Games.  Check.  I'm starting to get those warm and fuzzies.  But in the spirit of Emeril, you best believe we still have notches to kick it up to! 

So lets talk a little social networking.  Because the thing about Newsblaster is that you can also play it through Facebook.  And when you do, you notice some interesting things.  To the picture-mobile!

We'll start with the fact that score lists are always a good thing - because don't we all want to rub our friends noses in the fact that we are better at news ... playing... than they are?  But more importantly, because its in Facebook, Newsblaster knows who those friends are which makes for a more meaningful ranking.  I, as you can see, am infinitely  awesome ;-)

From here, you can choose to share the game with friends, or if you prefer, just let the wonders of viral social distribution do the work for you.



So do these games work?  After playing for 10 minutes, could I rattle off all of todays top headlines?  No, I won't say I can, but then again thats not really the point, is it?  I can name three or four of todays headlines - three or four more than I could have before I started playing.  And perhaps more importantly I can do it without reading through the paper or suffering through the local news broadcast.  I wouldnt go so far as to say that Newsbreaker and Newsblaster were the most fun casual games I've ever played.  But they were fun enough to happily spend a few minutes playing, and because of it, they were able to impart upon me a bit of news.  A bit of education, if you will. 

In the end, its not about Newsblaster.  Its not about the embeddable video clips.  Its not about other social features like "IM this Article" or "Rate this Article". The point of all of this is that MSNBC has build out a case study in speaking the language of your potential demographic.  News still might not be the most exciting thing in the world and the walled gardens of information have not completely crumbled.  But its nice to see that MSNBC has been willing to take a chance with less traditional ways of conveying information to people. 

Education anyone?  Story at 11.