Its been a while since I've done one of these, but I feel like there has been an influx of game + advertising/ promotion related news lately. It may not warrant deep, ranting discussion, but I did find a lot of this stuff interesting enough to at least bring up.
And awaaaaaaaay we go:
Obama Breaks Out The In-Game Advertising
The Obama presidential campaign has been nothing short of ground breaking in its use of technology to help marshal support for the Democratic nominee. But with the start of early voting, the Dems decided to spread their message into uncharted waters. And since I'm writing about it here, you can probably guess what those waters are =)
For the low low cost of $44 grand, the Obama campaign has placed in game advertising in 17 different video games (including Burnout: Paradise, shown) in 10 different battleground states, courtesy of Massive Inc. Massive reportedly also attempted to contact the McCain campaign to make a similar offer, but did not receive a response.
All effectiveness arguments aside, the move is brilliant in my opinion. The age range that encompasses the majority of gamers is also an age range with which Obama is experiencing extraordinary popularity. But this same group is also historically notorious for poor voter turnout. Speaking the language of your target audience. Brilliant. And as I'm sure you can guess, this is the first time a presidential candidate has ever advertised in a video game.
Though it does beg asking 1) will it work and 2) is there any risk of a negative response?
As a footnote, its also worth mentioning that Rock the Votes partnered with Xbox Live to try and inspire the youth vote. In the first two weeks of the effort, more than 55,000 voter registration forms were downloaded (though how many of those forms were turned into completed voter registrations is impossible to tell).
New Nissan Z Feels the "New For Speed"
Speaking of advertising firsts, for the first time ever, a car model will be premiered, not in the showroom, but in a video game. Nissan's 2009 370Z, a souped up version of the Z model sports coupe (now with more numbers!) will make its debut in Need for Speed: Undercover on November 18th, a day before its first appearance at an auto show, and 8 weeks before the car is released to dealers.
"Our relationship with EA has been instrumental
in bringing the Nissan brand to a passionate and unique audience,"
added Christian Meunier, Nissan's Vice President of Marketing. "By
launching the all-new 2009 Nissan Z first through Need For Speed Undercover,
we also gain the spirit and energy that EA gamers experience so
strongly. Together with EA, we have truly integrated the all-new 370Z
in the overall game experience in a meaningful, multi-layered and
profound way."
I'm very curious to see what exactly "meaningful, multi-layered and profound" integration of the Z into the Need for Speed experience means, but regardless its yet another example of a company using games as a means of making their message stand out in an increasingly saturated media market. Making their message stand out... if only educators were interested in something like that... wink wink...
Marketing Madden
For the more marketing inclined members of our studio audience, an interesting little writeup/ case study on the EA Sports Madden game franchise was recently pushed out by the fine folks at Nielson. Well worth the read for anyone interested in this stuff, but 3 quotes in particular I wanted to highlight.
A Little Creativity Can Go A Long (like 60 Stories) Way
Over the past few months, there is been a real glut in video game releases - most of which have been pretty high profile titles. Resistance 2, a "go shoot them aliens" game for the PS3 is one such title. Resistance 2 contains a highly publicized encounter with a 60 story tall Leviathan, which is running rampant through one of the game's cities obliterating everything in its path. Well what better way to earn a little buzz than to have a 60 story tall leviathan smash through real buildings. Sadly its just a screen (it would have been much cooler if someone could have figured out a way to get a 3D monster to hang off the side of a building) but even still, its a pretty slick way to get people talking.
Free Gas From Mercenaries
And awaaaaaaaay we go:
Obama Breaks Out The In-Game Advertising
The Obama presidential campaign has been nothing short of ground breaking in its use of technology to help marshal support for the Democratic nominee. But with the start of early voting, the Dems decided to spread their message into uncharted waters. And since I'm writing about it here, you can probably guess what those waters are =)For the low low cost of $44 grand, the Obama campaign has placed in game advertising in 17 different video games (including Burnout: Paradise, shown) in 10 different battleground states, courtesy of Massive Inc. Massive reportedly also attempted to contact the McCain campaign to make a similar offer, but did not receive a response.
All effectiveness arguments aside, the move is brilliant in my opinion. The age range that encompasses the majority of gamers is also an age range with which Obama is experiencing extraordinary popularity. But this same group is also historically notorious for poor voter turnout. Speaking the language of your target audience. Brilliant. And as I'm sure you can guess, this is the first time a presidential candidate has ever advertised in a video game.
Though it does beg asking 1) will it work and 2) is there any risk of a negative response?
As a footnote, its also worth mentioning that Rock the Votes partnered with Xbox Live to try and inspire the youth vote. In the first two weeks of the effort, more than 55,000 voter registration forms were downloaded (though how many of those forms were turned into completed voter registrations is impossible to tell).
New Nissan Z Feels the "New For Speed"
Speaking of advertising firsts, for the first time ever, a car model will be premiered, not in the showroom, but in a video game. Nissan's 2009 370Z, a souped up version of the Z model sports coupe (now with more numbers!) will make its debut in Need for Speed: Undercover on November 18th, a day before its first appearance at an auto show, and 8 weeks before the car is released to dealers.
"Our relationship with EA has been instrumental
in bringing the Nissan brand to a passionate and unique audience,"
added Christian Meunier, Nissan's Vice President of Marketing. "By
launching the all-new 2009 Nissan Z first through Need For Speed Undercover,
we also gain the spirit and energy that EA gamers experience so
strongly. Together with EA, we have truly integrated the all-new 370Z
in the overall game experience in a meaningful, multi-layered and
profound way."I'm very curious to see what exactly "meaningful, multi-layered and profound" integration of the Z into the Need for Speed experience means, but regardless its yet another example of a company using games as a means of making their message stand out in an increasingly saturated media market. Making their message stand out... if only educators were interested in something like that... wink wink...
Marketing Madden
For the more marketing inclined members of our studio audience, an interesting little writeup/ case study on the EA Sports Madden game franchise was recently pushed out by the fine folks at Nielson. Well worth the read for anyone interested in this stuff, but 3 quotes in particular I wanted to highlight.
- "And the NFL benefits from Madden’s realism. By educating its fan base
on everything from each team’s 53-man roster to the often complex
salary cap, the video game turns gamers into savvy NFL fans."
- "In addition, Madden offers official NFL sponsors a unique advertising opportunity to reach the often elusive young male demographic. Sprint, Snickers, and Under Armour—all league sponsors—have a significant presence in the video game."
- "According to EA Sports, the new campaign includes nearly two dozen television spots and more than 50 web vignettes. According to Nielsen, Electronic Arts spent over $10 million the past year and a half advertising across network, cable, and Spanish-language television, along with web banner ads, many of which were placed on ESPN.com"
A Little Creativity Can Go A Long (like 60 Stories) Way
Over the past few months, there is been a real glut in video game releases - most of which have been pretty high profile titles. Resistance 2, a "go shoot them aliens" game for the PS3 is one such title. Resistance 2 contains a highly publicized encounter with a 60 story tall Leviathan, which is running rampant through one of the game's cities obliterating everything in its path. Well what better way to earn a little buzz than to have a 60 story tall leviathan smash through real buildings. Sadly its just a screen (it would have been much cooler if someone could have figured out a way to get a 3D monster to hang off the side of a building) but even still, its a pretty slick way to get people talking.Free Gas From Mercenaries
This PR stunt earns a gold star on the Stub wall of awesome. Covering a 60 story building is one way to get noticed. But there is nothing like free stuff to really make people pay attention to you. And when the free stuff is gasoline, you've just managed to earn yourself a whole lot of ears.
At the end of August, right before the game Mercenaries 2 hit store shelves, they decided to run a promotion which they called "Petrol to the People". Though I have not yet played Mercs 2 myself, the stunt apparently ties strongly to a conflict in game, that revolves around Venezuelan oil being used to support a revolution against the government. The stunt itself involved offered free gasoline at gas stations in Los Angeles and London - gas stations which were tricked in in a Merc 2 theme, complete with actors dressed up as characters from the game.
Absolutely brilliant. Though at the time, the folks at EA may have forgotten to take into consideration the cost of gas, and the frenzy such a promotion has the potential to cause. All was well in the city of angels, but in London, police eventually had to shut down the event due to the municipal chaos it caused.
Images from gamepolitics.com, kotaku.com, playstation.com, 1up.com, and g4tv.com (x2)
At the end of August, right before the game Mercenaries 2 hit store shelves, they decided to run a promotion which they called "Petrol to the People". Though I have not yet played Mercs 2 myself, the stunt apparently ties strongly to a conflict in game, that revolves around Venezuelan oil being used to support a revolution against the government. The stunt itself involved offered free gasoline at gas stations in Los Angeles and London - gas stations which were tricked in in a Merc 2 theme, complete with actors dressed up as characters from the game.
Absolutely brilliant. Though at the time, the folks at EA may have forgotten to take into consideration the cost of gas, and the frenzy such a promotion has the potential to cause. All was well in the city of angels, but in London, police eventually had to shut down the event due to the municipal chaos it caused.
Images from gamepolitics.com, kotaku.com, playstation.com, 1up.com, and g4tv.com (x2)
According to the Wall Street Journal, MTV-EA-Harmonix is set to announce later today that they've negotiated a deal which will allow them to offer Beatles music in their Rock Band games.Yes. The Beatles.
In the world of music games, this is a big deal. Arguably the most popular and iconic band of all time, The Beatles are an enormous prize for the Rock Band franchise. One which presents an unprecedented opportunity to connect their games to an entirely new demographic/ generation of people.
But while its a big deal within the context of music games, its an even bigger deal when you look at the big picture. To showcase that bigger picture, a brief exercise.
Open up your friendly neighborhood iTunes music store and search for "The Beatles". There are 3 things you should notice rather quickly:
- Beatles cover bands are terrible.
- "Shes Got a Butt Bigger Than The Beatles" by Cledus T. Judd is the single worst song ever made. And...
- There is no actual Beatles music. Because The Beatles publisher has refused for *years* to release their music to Apple's service.
Lets recap. The Beatles, ie the biggest music sensation in history, have signed on with Rock Band, but not with iTunes. With a video game... but not most popular digital music distribution platform of our time. And they are not even the first notable group to follow this trend. ACDC, another wildly popular iTunes holdout, also has music in Rock Band.
If you read this blog, you know that I've been touting these games as a very possible future for music distribution for some time now. But I have to admit, I never thought that we'd see The Beatles in Rock Band before iTunes.
I can't wait to hear the rational (or the dollar amount) associated with this deal in the official press release later today. But if you're still skeptical about where this stuff is heading, I have a bridge in Alaska to sell you =)
Move over iTunes indeed.
UPDATE:
The deal has now been officially announced, with the press release available for your reading pleasure. As it turns out, the Beatles music will actually be part of an entirely new game, though its not clear at this point whether or not their tracks will also be available for download via Rock Band.
A quote from the Jeff Jones (CEO of Apple Corp, who control the rights to The Beatles music):
“Introducing the genius of The Beatles to a whole new generation of music lovers through original and inspired ways is extremely exciting to us at Apple Corps,” stated Jeff Jones, CEO, Apple Corps. “We are truly pleased to be working with the innovative forces at MTV and Harmonix as they embody our mutual passions for music and creativity.”
“Many of us have been part of a generation that has long enjoyed an enduring love affair with The Beatles and now we’re looking to extend that love affair for future generations to enjoy,” said Van Toffler.” “Our inspiration for this project comes from a keen sense of history and a place of utmost reverence and respect for the band, their music and their heritage.”
Simple awesomesauce.
Image from the theenglishteacheronline.com
A few days ago, I finished up the story mode of Saints Row 2. If you're not a gamer, SR2 might not be a household name, but it is, in 50 words or less, "a Grand Theft Auto-like open world game, which puts you at the head of a gang, caught in the middle of a brutal turf war in the fictional city of Stillwater". You know, typical wholesome family entertainment. If you think you can guess where it goes from there, you're probably close... or at least you would be, right after you take your prediction on violence, criminal activity, and immoral behavior and double it.
Though I could (and probably should) get to a post about what exactly it is that draws seemingly normal people to enjoy such deplorably virtual pursuits, that is a post that will need to be saved for another day. Because today I'd like to focus on another aspect of this particular game.
It is entirely possible that Saints Row 2 is the single most customizable game I've ever played. Character personalization has become pretty common in any game with RPG elements, so the fact that you get to tweak "yourself" to your liking is no surprise. But customizing yourself is only the beginning with SR2. A brief overview of the possibilities:
If it sounds overwhelming, it is. More importantly though, its flat out awesomesauce. But we'll press the pause button on this epic tale for a moment and switch gears.
A few weeks ago, the EGC had a design retreat with some friends from the College of Agriculture. The purpose of the retreat was to flesh out some design ideas for an animal raising game they are looking to build, which they hope will help teach some of the basic lessons of farm animal care (I'll save the specifics for another time). At one point in the retreat, however, the question was raised as to what would make this game compelling to play more than once - a critical question for any game designer, perhaps even more so for an EduGame designer.
All of this now brings us to the "so what" portion of the evening. Why should anyone care about the fact that a video game lets you customize the hell out of everything? And perhaps more importantly, what does a game about virtual gang violence have to do with raising a virtual pig?
The answer is ownership.
When you can make something your own, the sense of personal investment and attachment to that something grows. The more you're invested, the more you want to invest. Grand Theft Auto 4 is one of the greatest games of all time, and yet I've logged more time (post story) in SR2 in a week than I have in GTA4 in 6 months. Why? Because when GTA's story was over, so too was the game. When Saints Row 2's story ended, I found myself with more cribs to buy, more rides to pimp, more content to unlock. Almost nothing to do with the game and everything to do with me and my own intrinsic motivation to improve that which I feel as though is mine (this is exactly why The Sims franchise has crushed the top spots on the PC game sales charts).
I continue to play not because the game's narrative drives me to, but because its "my row" now. Investment breeds investment. Customization and personalization lead to motivation and re-playability.
Which is, my friends, exactly what virtual gang violence has to do with raising a virtual pig. Stay tuned.
Images from gamecenteronline.net, planetxbox360.com and animalattraction.com
Though I could (and probably should) get to a post about what exactly it is that draws seemingly normal people to enjoy such deplorably virtual pursuits, that is a post that will need to be saved for another day. Because today I'd like to focus on another aspect of this particular game.
It is entirely possible that Saints Row 2 is the single most customizable game I've ever played. Character personalization has become pretty common in any game with RPG elements, so the fact that you get to tweak "yourself" to your liking is no surprise. But customizing yourself is only the beginning with SR2. A brief overview of the possibilities:
- Your Character. Not only can you choose the basics of your character's physical appearance (age, gender, ethnicity, body type, hair style, etc) but you can also go nuts tweaking things down to the smallest detail. You can choose the width of the bridge of your nose, the verbal taunt you can use to antagonize your enemies, even your standard facial expression, gait, hand to hand combat style and even their in game voice.
- Your Cloths and Accessories. It verges on obscene that SR2 allows players to choose from almost 500 different pieces of clothing and accessories available at 12 different in game stores, ranging from shirts to facial piercings, right down to undergarments and socks.
- Your Weapons. Its not enough to have a shotgun. You need 5 different types of shotgun to choose from! I won't stress the weapon stuff too much, but lets just say you have lots of choices about what you'd like to wield (mercifully the game does not actually let you customize the weapons themselves in the absurd Army of Two fashion).
- Yours Cars. Tricking yourself out is one thing. Tricking your cars out brings the game to a whole different level. So you want to paint your car eh? Forget about the color. Do you want metallic, candy, pearl, or iridescent paint?. What about the accent areas? Paint or metal? Steel, gold, silver, platinum, aluminum, or chrome? You want NOS? Sure! A racing hood? No problem! How about the grip level or size of your tires or the style and color of your rims? Type of exhaust? Window tint? Convertible or hardtop? Upgrade your torque? How about frame stability, front and rear bumper style, headlight configuration, right on down to the placement of your rear view mirrors... Oh, and did I forget to mention that you can have as many cars, trucks, motorcycles, helicopters, private jets, and world war 2 fighters as you want, ranging from a tractor trailer cab to a Lamborghini.
- Your Crib. As the game progresses and you earn more cash, you can purchase various residence locations around town which functionally serve as massive inventory banks for all your stuff. But if you can't customize it, it doesnt belong in Saints Row. You can add pool tables, pianos, 50 inch plasmas, upgrade your bed, or pick from one of several overall styles for your place among other things.
- Your Crew. Pick the type of cloths your crew wears, the cars the'll drive, your gang sign and even your spray painted gang tag.
If it sounds overwhelming, it is. More importantly though, its flat out awesomesauce. But we'll press the pause button on this epic tale for a moment and switch gears.A few weeks ago, the EGC had a design retreat with some friends from the College of Agriculture. The purpose of the retreat was to flesh out some design ideas for an animal raising game they are looking to build, which they hope will help teach some of the basic lessons of farm animal care (I'll save the specifics for another time). At one point in the retreat, however, the question was raised as to what would make this game compelling to play more than once - a critical question for any game designer, perhaps even more so for an EduGame designer.
All of this now brings us to the "so what" portion of the evening. Why should anyone care about the fact that a video game lets you customize the hell out of everything? And perhaps more importantly, what does a game about virtual gang violence have to do with raising a virtual pig? The answer is ownership.
When you can make something your own, the sense of personal investment and attachment to that something grows. The more you're invested, the more you want to invest. Grand Theft Auto 4 is one of the greatest games of all time, and yet I've logged more time (post story) in SR2 in a week than I have in GTA4 in 6 months. Why? Because when GTA's story was over, so too was the game. When Saints Row 2's story ended, I found myself with more cribs to buy, more rides to pimp, more content to unlock. Almost nothing to do with the game and everything to do with me and my own intrinsic motivation to improve that which I feel as though is mine (this is exactly why The Sims franchise has crushed the top spots on the PC game sales charts).
I continue to play not because the game's narrative drives me to, but because its "my row" now. Investment breeds investment. Customization and personalization lead to motivation and re-playability.
Which is, my friends, exactly what virtual gang violence has to do with raising a virtual pig. Stay tuned.
Images from gamecenteronline.net, planetxbox360.com and animalattraction.com
I'm not a big fan of chain messages. But every once and a while one comes along that is important enough to warrant passing on. Just about everyone I know is both registered and committed to vote this November, but just in case... a little reverse psychology for you.
Pass it on.
Pass it on.
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.
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
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!
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...
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
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
Recent Comments