Archive for the 'Game Business' Category



05
Dec

Games On: A different kind of Video Game Store

When you’re looking at the different ways that your media can reach the public it’s hard to forget the good old-fashioned power of retail in dominated by messy big-box stores and on-line discounters.

Apple hasn’t forgotten, of course.  And Game On intends to emulate their model:

Wander into Games On, nestled in the Pacific Beach neighborhood of San Diego, and you’ll be confronted  with the usual fixtures — demo stations, box-lined shelves, and monitors showing off footage from the latest titles dangling from the ceiling. Everything you come to expect from a stimageore specializing in the sale of video games is present and accounted for, but just as alien as it is familiar.

Wide, open spaces replace haphazard obstacle courses around magazine racks and rival shoppers, games are given breathing room on the see-through shelves (Games On seems to know the difference between “display” and “storage”), and sleek flat-screens do next-gen games more justice than the smudgiest television in a traditional game retailer.

There’s a ton of questions that come to mind when comparing this to the Apple stores:

  • Apple controls the experience from beginning to end.  What happens when your message isn’t controlled and cohesive?
  • Apple sells more than just hardware, they sell an attitude. Are you making your consumer part of your world?
  • Is this a place to buy or simply a place to shop?  How do you convince a price sensitive audience to pay full retail?
  • PC games seem perfect for this audience since they tend to be a more engaged hobbyist consumer. Is the store console only?
  • What about an Internet presence?  It seems like there should be a way to take the experience home.

Ultimately this could be a great model, but I think the consumer really needs to understand what they’re getting by shopping here.  Here’s hoping they make it.

Would you pay a little extra to shop from a store like this?  Why or why not?

18
Nov

Commercial Games

Advertising a hardcore video game isn’t as straightforward as selling a TV show or movie.  Selling linear entertainment is as simple as giving a taste of the thing that your selling.  If you want to make a movie you stitch together a few scenes, throw on some music, hire one of the five big trailer voice guys and you’re good to go.  It’s a tiny version of the story, possibly more evocative and action packed than the movie itself, and it even uses the same talent and a similar format. Even print ads can push through a sense of the experience by creating some kind of pastiche of images and text to let you know what to expect.

But when it comes to Video Games, well, it’s hard to market something non-linear in a linear fashion. The cut-scenes, the graphics, the voice overs, all do nothing to represent the genuine experience of the game.  The part you do with your hands and brain, and not your eyes.

And lets not beat around the bush, for the last thirty years gaming has had to suffer through some of the worst marketing ever pushed onto an audience. I’s not even that hard to put a single word onto the problem that infected most of game advertising: Contempt.

For a while it seemed that a majority of ads were trying to sell the games to a crowd of basement dwelling geeks or uber-hip nerds who gain social credibility only by being dicks to their friends because they are not HARD CORE enough.  The problem with these stereotypes is that they never existed outside of spreadsheets and Powerpoint presentations. And that led to a sense that the people making these ads feel that games are kind of stupid and beneath them.

It’s gotten a little easier for the marketers as the games have become more realistic and less abstract.  Improved graphics and fabulous cut-scenes meant that you could put actual imagery from the game in your commercial. Spice it up with a little Hollywood magic and you could turn it into a movie trailer.  Check out this ad for Halo 2:

Yeah, it’s gorgeous, but everyone didn’t already know what the gameplay was, what the hell would they know after watching that ad above? 

The rise of signature characters (probably starting with Lara Croft) was another lifesaver for marketers drowning in a digital sea.  If the character is well designed it’s already evoking the type of gameplay that the player can expect.  Unlike the straight trailer, bumping up your signature hero with high-end graphics and exciting voice overs can actually help sell the user on what to expect when playing the game, especially if you’re selling third person gameplay.  One of my favorite example of this was the thirty second spot for the first God of War”

That’s a great ad for a lot of reasons, and when you finally did sit down to play the game you found out that what you saw was reasonably close to what you got.

Of course, first person is harder.  The game experience is a little different, and frankly less cinematic.  You also don’t get to see your character (besides hands and guns) for the majority of the experience. Gears of War was actually a hybrid, with the player character in view at all times, but I still think this commercial shows how it can be done right:

That’s an amazing ad in so many ways.  The fact that it counter-points the violence with quiet manages to perfectly capture the way your television screen is filled with violence even though game playing is relaxing activity that takes place in the calm of your living room.

Microsoft’s marketers do seem to have figured it out.  The Halo 3 commercials are masterful. Evocative, and relaxed.  They’re also managing to send a message about the multiplayer experience at the same time they’re giving out hints on the single player story.

Here’s a great one you may have missed from the series they did where they looked back on Halo as if it was a great historical conflict:

But even the best ads represent only the beginning of a relationship. If a commercial crass attempt to trick a potential player into trying to sell the player on something that the game isn’t, they’re going to figure it out pretty quickly that they’re being sold a bill of goods.

Most hardcore gamers are never going to make a buy decision based around an ad alone anyway.  What they want is peer revue and social value.  If the developers have created a unique feature that makes the product worthwhile then the best bet is to feature that in any way possible. If it isn’t all that and a bag of chips, then show the player chips, not the bag. There must be some reason to play the game, at least for a little while. And no amount of blood, gruff voice acting, motion graphics, and attitude is going to make it better:

In the end the game had better deliver on what the commercial promised.  That doesn’t mean that it needs to be perfect, but it does need to be what’s advertised.  If the early adopters and reviewers are disappointed by the experience, the very same Internet that carries all of the media, viral marketing, and print ads will become a focal point of scorn and derision.

01
Nov

Sony Remembers

Sony has a new ad out for the PS3.  It’s still pretty abstract, but it has video of actual games in it!

Probably too little too late, but it’s something for the holidays.

23
Oct

Core Logic

image The XBox 360 Core Unit was always a poor alternative to the basic hard-drive enabled console.  It was a kind of FU to the consumer that anyone with two minutes and the ability to type in a Google search could quickly realize was going to be a poor way to get into next generation gaming.  Even if you wanted to save $100, it was going to cost you $50 just to buy a memory card that would actually let you save your games.  What they got for their trouble was some bad press and a machine that many stores refused to stock.

With the Arcade 360 Microsoft seems to have actually realized that it pays to treat their audience with a little respect.  Packing in a memory card and five decent games, they’ve managed to set it at a price point that won’t make you feel deep regret if you decide to go out and buy a hard drive upgrade later on.

It also means there is a viable next-gen console available for under $300.  It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas.

21
Oct

Orange Box Blues

image Valve released the ”Orange Box” last week. If the title is a bit odd it’s because what’s inside of it isn’t actually a “game” at all.  Valve has grouped together a collection of two previously released titles along with three brand new goodies and sold them all at the price of a single game.  It’s a good idea, but the irony is that the littlest game in the pack has the biggest bang for the buck. 

At first I thought I’d be able to put off the purchase for a little while. Maybe a month or so.  I played Half Life 2 when it first came out, and while it’s fun to see where the story is going I’m not really aching to find out what happens next.  Game narrative can sometimes be compelling, but if I’m looking for story there’s a lot of movies and books that I still need to catch up on before I’m going to worry about what Gordon Freeman is up to lately. And if there isn’t some cool new game design in there (and I’ve heard there isn’t) then it’s not really worth it for me to pop the game into the drive. And while Team Fortress looks good and has some unique features, my itch for mutliplayer action has been pretty well scratched over the last few weeks with Halo 3. 

But Portal  is something special.  If I had to describe the genre of the game I’d call it a “First Person Puzzler”. And if you’ve never heard that term before it’s because no one has made a game like this before. The player is given a gun that lets place two portals on the walls or floors that connect to each other no matter where they are.  Each level is a small area where where the player must use figure out how to escape the room that they’ve been trapped in using the portal gun and whatever has been left in the room for them. 

I only played it for an hour last Monday when someone brought a copy into the office.  But since then I’ve found myself longing to finish the rest of it.  And it isn’t just the design.  The game has a wicked sense of humor that really enhances the experience.

I tried to fight its siren song, but by Wednesday it was hopeless.  I wasn’t going to be able to wait any longer.  I had to get a copy.image

There’s basically three ways you can get your hand on Portal.  The Orange Box for the Xbox 360 is $60.  That’s cool, but most of the folks I know are playing it on the PC, so if I’m going to play Team Fortress 2 at all then I’ll want the PC version.  For the PC, it’s $50 as a downloadable, but only $40 if you can find a retail copy on sale. And finally Portal can be downloaded for $20 all by itself.  But at that point it seems like I might as well pitch in another $20 and get the entire package.  After hemming and hawing for a few days I got a copy from Amazon.com, and the game is on it’s way to me now.  It’s been a weird decision making process, but ultimately I went for the value proposition that Valve has been hoping consumers would bite on. If would have needed to cover a $30 spread I probably would have just bought Portal by itself, even if the price is a little steep for a three hour game. 

In a world filled with blockbuster titles that only marginally add new ideas, it’s been left up to the indie market to create titles that can really be considered cutting edge. Whether the Orange Box ends up being a major success or a noble failure, it’s interesting to see them try.




car insurance debt consolidation sport