September 2008 Archives

Though you can find them in just about every technological system ever made, glitches are very rarely considered "positive".  Depending on their severity, they can cause loss of life, monetary shakedowns, require time consuming work arounds, or just irritate the hell out of people.  (Pay no attention to the author behind the curtain, who has been responsible for a bug or two in his day). 

There are two truths about bugs in any system, technological or otherwise.
1) They will always be hated (or at least disliked)
2) They will always exist

Taking those two points as they are, the creator of any system will likely have to do some form of damage control as a means of saving face and keeping the customer happy.  Typically this is an apologetic process, since its generally not considered good practice to have a) wasted someone's time b) wasted someone's money or c) produced a subpar product. As I said in my opening paragraph, bugs are rarely considered a positive.

Of course, thats all in how you play the course.

Every year since 1998, EA Sports has released Tiger Woods PGA Tour, the official golf game of you know who. Though Golf isnt quite my thing, Tiger Woods sells pretty well relatively speaking, and has come to be the big dawg in the merciless world of golf video games (clarification: not actually merciless). However despite its dominance, Tiger Woods PGA Tour is, like any game, system, or technology, not without a few bugs. And bugs are bad mmkay.

Back in August of '07, a Youtube user posted a video of a rather dubious bug in the then current Tiger Woods game that he referred to as "the Jesus shot".  This bug allowed users who hit shots into water hazards to play them... by levitating on the surface of  good ole H2O.  Obviously this is not a catastrophic failure, but in a game that prides itself on realism, the Jesus shot represented a bit of an embarrassing oversight in quality assurance.  Oh... and in case I forgot to mention, YouTube is kinda... how do I put this?  Public.  So one user's documented bug was viewed by more than 640,000 people.  Whoops!

But instead of hemming and hawing and begging for forgiveness, EA played it cool, stowed away Levinator25's well documented bug, to one day use it to their advantage.

Almost a year after the original video was posted, EA produced a response that turned a onetime black eye into a brilliant PR move that coincided with the release of the newest version of Tiger Woods PGA Tour.  Take a look.




Hole.  In.  One.

EA's video response has received more than 2.2 million views, nearly three and a half times as many views as the original bug video, not to mention 25 video responses, and almost 3,300 comments.  The response was so successful, in fact, that it was eventually aired on television.  And it all started with a bug.

A few things worth mentioning here:

1) Image is Everything
Ironically enough, despite being a gaming super giant, EA doesnt exactly have the best reputation as far as being innovative or customer friendly.  Obviously this ad is an exception, not the rule to the way EA handles its dirty laundry, but its a step in the right direction toward revamping their image.

2) Tivo Makes Commercials Suck
I mentioned that the ad was eventually aired on television, but it did not begin there.  Praveeta Singh, the game's product manager, had something interesting to say about that in an interview with Business Week.

"It's really important as we look at our marketing list to reach new marketing mediums.  People are on the Internet and one of the things we consider is that, with TiVo, people skip over commercials. You think about all the things you're doing in a day, you might not watch TV, but you've probably been online. As marketers we're looking for different ways to approach our customers. We want this new Tiger ad to be appealing and show that there's a new game out there."

Which leads me to my third point...

3) The Danger In Not Playing the Game
Though I've long since been indoctrinated into the fold, every time I step outside of my bubble I'm reminded that there are still those in positions of power who fear the openness of web 2.0  "We can't let our customers post reviews publicly!  What if they speak ill of our product?!  We can't let our employees blog, what if they bash the organization?!"

The moral of the Jesus Shot case study is clear: people will invariably say what ever it is they want to say.  True, Levinator25 did not post his video on some sort of official EA support forum.  So from a traditional PR perspective, potential buyers visiting the EA website would not see it under EA's name.  But if 640,000 people have seen it anyway, pretending the problem does not exist is no longer an option.  Either you can be aware of, and engage in the dialogue occurring in the social web, or the conversation can happen without you.  The old ways are coming to an end.  Hope you're paying attention =) 

The Jesus shot is a bug - a negative, a mistake.  Or at least it could have been.  Instead, by addressing it head on, it has become a major positive: an EA image booster, an explosively viral ad, and a brilliant means of creating buzz for a new product.

A new way of thinking about relating to your stakeholders?  Or is it all just par for the web 2.0 course? Either way, its good to see. Well played EA.





Images from bobmitchellinthe21stcentury.wordpress.com and escapistmagazine.com 

In the gaming world, "free" is not one of those used that gets used a lot.  There are a lot of reasons for this, Capitalism and the need to swim in pools of gold being the two biggest.  But sufficed to say that consumers will almost always foot the bill for high production games and all they encompass.

So it came as a bit of a surprise to me to read that David Orr, the man behind the music for the recent Xbox Live Arcade hit Castle Crashers, has decided to release all of the game's music for free under a creative commons license.  Though the Castle Crashers score might not quite be a John Williams, it was extremely impressive for an independent game and added a fantastic quality to the Crashers experience.

I won't babble about this forever, but its great to see a player (and a successful one at that) in the dollar centric, highly competitive gaming industry make a move toward openness and sharing.  Interestingly enough, David is only a 19 year old student.  Perhaps this is an omen of the mentality of future generations?  Only time will tell.

Below are links to all of the game's tracks available for download at Newgrounds.  This listing was originally posted on the official Xbox forums.  Personally I'm a big fan of the opening theme (Four Brave Champions), Thieves Forest (Space Pirates), and Ice Castle (Second Thoughts).

Kudos to you David!

--------------------------------

Opening Title Screen:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/90433

Arena Theme:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/21749

Blacksmith and Shop Theme:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/86480 

Forest Entrance:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/168734

Thieves Forest:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/57239

Abandoned Mill Chase:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/36657

The Cave song:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/123607

Wedding Crash Hallway:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/70107

Snow Level:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/117474

Forest Troll:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/169148

Parade:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/90532

Lava World:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/112527

Pirate Ship:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/37040

Online Menu:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/91286

Flying Black Knight Fight:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/120136

Desert Stage:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/168281

Marsh:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/168396

Ice Castle:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/90521

End of level:

http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/110798

--------------------------------

Image from gamesetwatch.com

In a year ripe with major video game releases, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed had achieved the coveted third spot in Stub's "ZOMG I NEEDS 2 BE OWNING THAT GAME"  list of 2008.  Big deal, I know.  And so Monday night, at 11:55 pm, there I was at Gamestop, not so patiently waiting for its midnight release.  Some people say I'm getting too old for that sort of thing.  I just squirt those people with my Ecto Cooler juice box. 

I'm still on the fence as to whether Force Unleashed is the best Star Wars game of all time (I'm leaning towards no) but sufficed to say its up there.  The fun factor is off the charts, the story (so far) is fantastic, and I feel pretty comfortable saying that Unleashed has been a better contribution to the Star Wars universe than the entire prequel trilogy.  But this isnt a post about Star Wars, or even really the Force Unleashed.  Its about mechanics - more specifically, one I don't like very much. 

There is a design tactic in video games known as "quick time events" or QTEs.  If you are not a gamer, or if the term doesnt ring a bell, QTEs "allow for limited control of the game character at cinematic points in the game, and generally involves the player following onscreen prompts to press buttons" *.  Put more concisely, quick time events allow you to have a minimal interaction with in game movies.  And that all amounts to something that looks like this (nothing major is revealed in this clip - also no sound for some reason).



The purpose of the QTE, as you can see from the video, is to blend the interactivity of a game with the highly scripted "cinematography" of a movie to create an extremely compelling experience.  All you as the player need to do to make this scene play out is to press the right button when prompted to do so (shown by the triangle, X, square, or circles that appear).  The result?  Game interactions that are nothing short of stunning.  Movies that you can play.  Visually, the quick time event phenomenon is a home run.

But is it any fun?  And if the interactivity of the game is little more than a monkey see monkey do routine, does it really capture the spirit of interactivity that games are built upon?  Does it just become a crutch?

The very idea behind the QTE detracts from the point of a video game.  When you finish a defeat a boss in a game, it feels good because you accomplished something.  Every boss has weaknesses, and in any game worth its salt, success involves developing and effectively implementing a strategy to exploit those weaknesses.  Ultimately, part of that strategy will involve button mashing (or Wii waggling) because that is how we interface with games.  But choosing which buttons to press, and indeed why you choose the buttons you do is what makes the accomplishment an accomplishment. Its what makes games worth playing.  And that says nothing of the way the jarring and obvious prompts detract from the immersion of an otherwise well designed experience.  Oh, and detracting from the immersion detracts from the learning potential.  Not so bueno.    

When quick time events are used, it removes any strategy from a game, in favor of Simon Says and eye candy.  Value is most certainly added, but even more is lost, at least in my opinion.  Because QTEs deny you the opportunity to make your own decisions.  Either do what you are told, or fail.  There is no need for practice or experimentation.  No customization.  No individuality, no reflection, no decisions to make.  There is nothing to discuss.  

Become a beautiful lemming, or die.

I love Force Unleashed.  God of War.  Resident Evil 4.  Honestly, I would be lying if I told you I didnt enjoy a beautifully rendered quick time event.  And to be fair to any game I've ever played that utilized the QTE mechanic, it is the exception of interaction, not the rule.  The finishing move.  The means to make sure you're awake.  The emphasis.  But something feels cheap about the artificial view, as if it all came at the price of the things I love most about games.

Is it worth it I wonder?  I have to think not.  But for whatever its worth, I thought it on my own.





* quote from Wikipedia "Quick Time Event"
Image from amazon.com and gamespy.com

 

Its a strange feeling, to come to an epiphany so seemingly obvious the the elation of its discovery is overshadowed by the humility that everyone else on the planet might already know it.  And yet despite that, I feel the need to discuss this most recent revelation of mine.  With apologies, let us begin.

The past few months have been rich with various events for me.  The Games Learning and Society conference.  The Learning Design Summer Camp.  My first masters class - The Ethics of Science and Technology.  And earlier this week, the Designs on eLearning conference. Though each event (or class) has been an interesting experience and valuable for multiple reasons, one common thread has permeated them all.  The diversity of perspectives.

There is something to be said for gathering together and sharing ideas with those like you - people who think about, struggle with, and understand the challenges you face.  But increasingly I'm wondering if there is more to be said about sharing ideas with those who are nothing like you at all.

In reflecting back on the some of the most enjoyable, thought provoking, inspiring professional conversations I've had over the past few months, a majority of them have occurred with people who came from a different place than I did.  Different backgrounds.  Different academic fields.  Different job responsibilities.  Different schools.  Different countries.  Different rules, different challenges, and ultimately different goals.  It is only a common interest, or perhaps more appropriately a curiosity in something that bridges the differences just enough to bring people together and begin conversations. 

And the eye opening potential of those conversations is tremendous.

This idea is not new or original.  It was articulated months ago by The Brainy Gamer.  It was articulated in class on Wednesday, by Professor Steve Walton and at the Designs on eLearning conference by Dr. Thylias Moss. It is the reason why, as a culture, we value diversity.  It should be, as I mentioned before, so obvious that it can hardly be considered a revelation.  Yet somehow... something feels new today.  As if for the first time I understand something I had thought I'd known for my entire professional life.

Does it mean I'm no longer interested in perspectives similar to my own?  Far from it.   

Maybe I need to spend more time thinking outside of my own world.  Maybe I crave a level of thinking that homogenous perspectives no longer afford.  Or maybe thinking out loud of a friday afternoon just leads to incoherent drivel.

Regardless, it does mean something.  Now to figure out what...

Few things are better than Sunday mornings in Fall.  The changing leaves, the dew in the grass, that perfect crisp temperature, and the untapped potential of an entire day of NFL football to come.  Ah the good life. 

Historically, I've never been much for NFL pregame shows.  The two most "valuable" parts of the show - the injury report and the "expert" fantasy football advice usually just end up being exercises in frustration.  95% of injuries seem to result in the dreaded "game time decision" call - which is about as useful as a 50% chance of scattered showers forecast.  Thanks.  Thanks a lot.  And I'm not sure what constitutes a fantasy expert, but personally it makes me crazy to hear people ask questions like "which all star should I start".  Am I the only person that plays in a Fantasy league with more than 4 people?  Make a call between a 2nd string fullback and a 3rd string tight end.  Then you can call yourself an expert.   But I digress...

Despite my nitpicky frustration with NFL pregame shows, my obsession with Fantasy Football has driven me to salivate over any little nugget of wisdom that I could over-analyze to death, and so I've found myself watching ESPN's Sunday NFL Countdown more and more of late.  Its a good show, all things considered, if for no other reasons than Chris Berman going "woop!" and The Mayne Event.

But as I tuned in yesterday for the first Sunday of the NFL season, I noticed something very interesting.  Tom Jackson, one of the show's co-hosts, was diagramming a play on the set's mini field.  This in and of itself is nothing special - the crew will do this every week to try and explain some of the nuances of players or schemes to NFL fans.  But this particular week, Jackson was walking through a field which had been overlaid with virtual players from the Madden '09 video game (Merrill Hodge shown below)

The feature is known as the EA Sports Virtual Playbook and though you might think it would be gimmicky, it was actually surprisingly cool - and even better, helpful as a means of explaining some of the finer points of football 101. It also opens up the door to being able to kick Monday Morning quarterbacking up a notch using Madden to recreate plays, yard for yard, and ask the "what if" questions that can really help you understand and dare I say learn some of the strategy behind the game.  Hmm... that sounds sort of familiar...

Last August I made the prediction that games like Madden had the potential to become an interactive film room.  Not too bad if I do say so myself =)  And I havent even gotten to the "Madden Moments" feature which lets you play through some of the most exciting moments of the 2007 NFL season - virtually recreated. 

Good.  Very good.  But lets bring it up to the next level.  Take a look (and a listen) at what some of the major players in this initiative have to say. 

ESPN Executive VP of Content, John Skipper via the New York Times:
“It’s a way for us to remain relevant. We want to make sure we remain connected to lots and lots of fans, and using the language that gamers understand is one way.”

EA Sports President Peter Moore via 1Up:
"The story here is that our industry is impacting mass media.  Video games are often treated as a villain, the 'boy in the bedroom'.  Now games are leading the way."

And of course, John Madden himself:
"We want the game on television to look like the video game"


Games represent a piece of the future.

Its too early to know how the Virtual Playbook will be received - this is only day 2 of its existence.  But rest assured, I'll be following this with keen interest. 

Games.  Football.  And the future of entertainment and interactive analysis.  I guess I can think of something better than Sundays mornings in the fall.



Image from nytimes.com