The Toy Story Moment

Note: While looking for something I found this unpublished blog of mine from July 5th, 2011. While some of it is dated and the question at the end seems silly in the day of DOTA and LoL, some of the thoughts timeless, so I thought I'd share it!

The Toy Story Moment
Much has been written of video games needing a Citizen Kane moment. Something that makes transcend to another level. I've never really agreed or disagreed with that premise, other than to suggest that if we are trying to get that point, better blood splattering physics isn't ever going to get us there. Regardless, beyond having a Citizen Kane moment I've wondered recently if video games needs a Toy Story moment. Furthermore, I've wondered if perhaps we're having it right now.

Yesterday I was watching Rio with my kids and I was struck by the audience. The movie was at the dollar theater, where you will find movies that are beyond their "big" theater run. However, the fact that the film is "old" didn't make the audience any less enthusiastic. The theater was packed from front to back and was involved in the show, laughing at the funny bits and holding their collective breaths when things got tense.

Before the movie began I watched the audience trickle in. We'd gotten there 15 minutes before the show began as I had a feeling there may be a larger audience on a holiday, and sitting my large family of 8 together often proves challenging. Watching the audience take their seats left me somewhat surprised. There were many parents with their kids, but there were also lots of adults who seemingly had no kids with them at all. I took notice of them and watched as the theater cleared after the movie to be sure I was correct in my evaluation. As I watched the theater empty I'd guess that maybe as much as one third of the audience was adults who were not there with children.

That shouldn't be too shocking, after all adults should be able to enjoy a movie like Rio if they want to. It has some wonderful animation in a beautiful backdrop, as well as a pretty solid story with a message about the exotic bird pet trade that would more likely be a heated adult conversation topic than something kids would discuss on the playground. However, that said, the movie was clearly made with younger audiences in mind.

Disney Digression
I can never write about something that is aimed for adults or kids without wondering exactly what that term really means or who decides what is for adults and what is for kids. I love Walt Disney on the topic:

"in planning a new picture, we don't think of grown-ups, and we don't think of children, but just of that fine, clean, unspoiled spot down deep in every one of us that maybe the world has made us forget and that maybe our pictures can help recall."

I really love that thought and approach. I think that some of the best and most memorable games ever made, have the same heart beating in them. One more Walt Disney quote:

"I do not make films primarily for children. I make them for the child in all of us, whether we be six or sixty. Call the child "innocence". The worst of us is not without innocence, although buried deeply it might be. In my work I try to reach and speak to that innocence, showing it the fun and joy of living; showing it that laughter is healthy; showing it that the human species, although happily ridiculous at times, is still reaching for the stars."

I really think Walt hits perfectly on the joy and wonder that I long for in all mediums, and often find in games.

Back on Topic
I pondered for awhile as I saw all the kid-free adults in the theater. Would they have all come to this movie if it were a cartoon?

I didn't ponder too long on the thought because I was sure the answer was 'no.' There may have been a time when they would have (1930s-50s?), but that time is long past. Hand-drawn animated movies are rarely seen in the cinemas anymore. Even when they were in the theaters, they rarely appealed to all audiences. Parents may have gone to see The Little Mermaid, but they felt it was for their kids, no matter what Walt said.

Something changed with computer animation. I think maybe we can call it the Toy Story moment. The movies were still the same family fun affair, but the barrier of adult acceptance crumbled somewhat. There are many adults who love computer animated movies and can't wait for the next Pixar or Dreamworks feature. While they may have felt that hand-drawn animation was for kids, they can't help themselves when it comes to computer animation in the theater.

The result is a wider audience for computer animated films than for hand-drawn ones. This is very apparent in the theaters where there are many more computer animated features being released today than there were hand-drawn films being released when cartoons were at height of their success. In fact, a quick look at movie releases over the last 40 years indicates that over the last 10 years the average number of computer animated films released per year has been much higher than the average number of hand-drawn films ever was.

Looking at the audience that was in attendance for Rio yesterday, it's easy to see why.

What does it mean to games?
I've wondered if gaming might need a Toy Story moment. A moment that erodes the barrier between the medium and the audience. Something that grabs the people who aren't interested in games and makes them feel like gaming is something that is for them. Just like the audiences that would not consider going to a hand-drawn animated feature, but are interested in computer animated films, I was pondering what could be done in gaming to open it up to more people.

And then I realized I shouldn't be straining my head thinking about what could be and I should instead look at what already was right in front of me.

While waiting for the movie to begin, I pulled out my phone. Fittingly, on my desktop was an icon that said Rio. It was the icon for the game Angry Birds Rio.

Though I'm not a fan of Angry Birds myself, there are a few people who are. Ok, there are millions of people who are. Something interesting about those fans is that they are less likely to have played other games than the average game fan. They are more likely to have little knowledge of gaming, but no less passionate about their love for that game. Angry Birds is a game that makes video games inviting to people who don't play them. (notably it is on a device that also does the same thing)

There are more examples of this of course, Facebook games and the Wii both do similar things, much to the chagrin of "core gamers." Zumba Fitness and Just Dance have been stellar in the stores, being purchased by people who don't normally purchase games, and who likely, are buying the only game they'll purchase this year.

So what does it all mean to so-called core gaming?

Is core gaming becoming the 'old school?' Does it represent hand-drawn animated films in the gaming industry?

That's something that is worth thinking over, so I'll leave it for thought. I can see a lot of reasons why the answer is absolutely not! I can also see things that make me worry I'm totally wrong. One last interesting fact. In 1994, the year before Toy Story was released, Disney released The Lion King. The Lion King is the top grossing hand-drawn animated feature of all time.

After The Lion King's release, Disney continued releasing one, and sometimes 2, hand-drawn films each year until the year 2004, at which point it began focusing its internal studios on computer animation instead of hand-drawn animation.

Again I don't know what it all means or how comparable it is, but as I sat there in the theater yesterday, I thought the parallels were interesting and worth thinking about if nothing else.

Well, as a rule I am trying not to comment on the works of other people. But one thing I can tell you is that I really appreciate the variety of different videogames that are being made by so many different types of people. However, many people are working solely in a single genre that is concentrated on excessive violence, and the only competition there is who can come up with the most violent depictions. That’s not something that I really appreciate. And I think that when there are many people working in such a genre, the job of me and Nintendo is to try to establish to the world that there are a great many other ways to take advantage of the interactive format of videogames; to provide fun and surprise to the people around the world.

The above is from a recent Q&A with Shigeru Miyamoto, and all I can say is Amen!

Well of course that isn't all I can say, but his statement definitely reflects my thinking. I joked for a long time that the only thing that ever breaks up the monotony of a guy holding a gun appearing on seemingly every gaming magazine cover was two guys holding guns.

I'm a very open fan of what Nintendo does. I like diversity. It's something I hold dear, and I'm glad that despite Nintendo taking a lot of heat, angst, and straight-up hatred from so-called gamers, that Nintentdo continues to follow their own direction.

Over the last 4 years Nintendo has proved that there are a lot of gamers out there who are fans of more than just guys with guns, and I'm very excited to see what Nintendo does next.

Big Fish - Little Pond

It's a common phrase, and increasingly it's one I think applies to the Game Industry as I note how relatively unknown the game industry is among the older generation.

Background:
I had a neighbor, a friend of my wife, who came by as my kids were playing Airport Mania on a Wii test kit I'd brought home for testing. When my kids shouted triumphantly that it was Airport Mania, but on the Wii! The neighbor, who incidentally had unexpectedly found my game on the PC without realizing until looking at the credits that I'd made it, looked at my kids and asked what the Wii was. I explained it was the newest machine from Nintendo, and she then asked who Nintendo was.

I was talking to a college roommate last weekend about the games we make, and that we've expanded to the iphone. He was unfamiliar with the casual space, so I said they were games somewhat similar to Bejeweled. He asked what Bejeweled was. I said it was from PopCap. He asked who that was.

I took some games home to my dad last weekend, to get an expert opinion, and in one of them there was some match 3 play (like Bejeweled). He wasn't sure what he was supposed to do b/c he'd never seen a match 3 game before in his life.

I went to the doctor a couple of months ago and while talking to him about a knee injury, I mentioned WiiFit. He wasn't familiar with it. I told him it was for the Nintendo Wii, he had no idea what it was. I further explained computer games, working through everything I could think of to convey the concept of playing a game on a TV or computer, and finally getting to Tetris, which he knew, due to being from Eastern Europe.

Big Fish - Little Pond
Being in an industry every day can make you feel like everyone knows what you know. That's not uncommon for any industry, but it's especially prevalent in the games industry because there is so much media coverage of the industry.

However, as I ask around, and talk to people, the fact that most people don't play games is apparent.

What does that mean?
Honestly, it doesn't mean that much. If you were to pick something not to do, games would be a good thing to have on your list. Gaming is entertainment, and it is a type of entertainment that is often abused as people spend both their free time and their work time playing games. If you were not to be playing games, your time could be better spent. It could be worse spent as well, but the point is, that not playing games isn't a bad thing, and is potentially it could be a good thing.

As much as Nintendo has tried to turn gaming into a good thing and spread it to the masses as either enlightening, useful, or family fun, gaming is still looked down upon, and most people don't play, aren't involved, and don't even know what gaming is today.

As a game creator, I do want people to play. But instead of wanting people to come play my games, I want to make games for them. I don't expect people to like Jazz music or baseball because I do. I want to figure out what they do like, and make something for them.

It's a Pond, Not the Ocean
Which brings me to my next point. Actually it doesn't. But I'm going to let that first part simmer and move on anyway.

Recently the Dead Space Extraction numbers for Wii were released, and they were horrible. 9200 copies in the first month. This type of poor sales inevitably leads to someone saying that Mature games don't sell on the Wii because that's a console for kids, not adults.

But the Wii is selling to adults. 7 year olds are not the ones buying WiiFit.

The real issue here is that adults don't like shooters. (at this point some readers get upset to the point of wanting to respond to this piece without reading the rest...don't do that...read on)

I was looking at some survey data recently which showed that FPS games were among the Top 5 genres for players up to age 35. At age 35 FPS dropped into a tie for 10th.

As people get older, their tastes change. If you haven't gotten old yet, just wait, it will happen to you.

What has mostly happened, is that as people have gotten older, they've simply stopped playing games. The Japanese market has been giving a wonderful demonstration of this fact for the last 10 years, which is what lead Nintendo to go a completely different route.
The casual games market on the PC is mostly female over 35. In fact, I've started to wonder. Are there more women over 35 playing games than there are men? I honestly think the answer to that question is 'yes.'

Which has got me thinking. Why?
I've talked to people at my work (where we make games), around my neighborhood, at church, and other places, and there is a very interesting trend. Hardly any of the guys my age (I'm 35) play games. Hardly any at all.

...and that includes the people I work with who make games for a living.

Most of them played years ago, but they've stopped entirely, and they have little interest in the games of today. Dead Space is not turning their heads.

So I've started wondering what might.
Instead of thinking about the size of the fish, I've started thinking about the size of the pond.

Isn't there an ocean out there?

What would a 40 year old guy want to play?
(really...what? you may have an anecdote about some guy or small group that plays COD every weekend, but its rare...really rare...I'm convinced that the #1 reason this age group doesn't play is b/c of a lack of content made for them)

What are 40 year old guys like?
(this is really an interesting question to me, one which I've written down attributes to and thought about a lot as I've considered what the audience does...and why they do it. I'm pretty convinced that the way to make a game for a 40 year old is to make the game for a 40 year old.)

What would my dad play?
(notably he's been interested in Wii Sports, the first game he's personally asked to play in 20 years! Beyond that though...what would make him interested in playing - note that my dad's 59. Prior to Wii Sports the last game he enjoyed playing was RC Pro-AM.)

It's been an interesting thought journey thinking about what games are, and what they could be. Perhaps it will spur some thought that will lead to a game for guys over 40, or for a game aiming for that ocean of older folk (aka the majority of the people on the earth) instead of being satisfied with being a big fish in a small pond.

The WiiSports Resort bounce?

I'm curious to see how the new Wii Sports does.

Well ok, I'm sure it is going to do well, but I don't know if it will be #1 game of the year well or #5 game of the year well.

Certainly it is following up on one of the biggest games ever released, but...and this is a big but...it's actually a very expensive game.

WiiMotion Plus is $20/unit.
WiiSports Resort is $50 (includes one WM+)

Altogether it's $110 (which is cheap compared to Rock Band, I know...however...)

I have two general concerns about how the public will react to the game.

#1 - I wonder if the public will 'understand' the add-on. Add-ons are big business. Wheels, Guitars, Guns, and of course the Balance Board have become very dominant in the Top 10 charts. However, each of those add-ons has something that WM+ lacks. You can look at it and immediately understand it.
Guitar/Drums - got it, you play it like an instrument
Gun - pull the trigger, easy
Wheel - turn it like a wheel, all-good
Balance Board - stand on it like a kitchen scale/snowboard, makes sense
Now the list goes great right up until you add in WM+, which plugs into the Wii Controller. It's like a peripheral, but not like the current peripherals dominating the market. Will the average consumer understand it when they see it? Or will it just make them raise questions that they didn't know they should have "You mean the Wii motion isn't very accurate current?" Will grandma be excited about it or say, "I don't understand that new Wii thing, what does it do?" In fact, I've wondered if Bowling wasn't included in WiiSports Resort for just to try and convince Grandma.

I'm interested to see how it turns out though as it's quite unlike the normal peripheral, and I'm interested to see if the public 'gets it.' That will be hard to measure as it is following one of the most popular games of all time, and the sales will probably be initially strong. However, if they aren't, I'll circle back to this post in a few months and say...I wonder if this was partially right?

#2 - I often hear that the Wii is the cheapest console, but in my mind it is one of the most expensive. Here's the math:
$250 - Wii
$40 - WiiMote (x3)
$20 - Nunchuck (x3)
$10 - One copy of WiiPlay with WiiMote

That's $440.
Of course many people will point out that two games were included, and it would be more to get a similar set-up with Xbox or PS3, but the difference is that less people buy 3 extra controllers for those consoles. The Wii is selling a lot more controllers as people are playing it in groups and families. So when looking at the average set-up, they become a little closer to parity.

It becomes more interesting with WiiSports Resort. Nintendo believes the game will be a system seller, and that is, in part, why they have not decreased the price of the console. However, if you add the $110 for WiiSports Resort and 3 WM+, you are now at $550!

I honestly don't know if $550 is going to be a price that people can handle. I do believe the game will sell systems, but I wonder if most of those systems will be bought b/c of WiiSports Resort, but not actually with WiiSports Resort. It seems to me that Nintendo by virtue of making a controller that costs $80 (Wiimote + Nunchuck + WM+), is pricing itself a bit on the high side and that it is likely to decrease the rate of adoption.


Paired together, I see these two reasons and making WiiSports a very interesting release for Nintendo. If it doesn't strike gold right away, I would expect Nintendo to look at a way to bring the console cost down either by WM+/game bundles or a price reduction to the console itself.

Either way, Nintendo is making an interesting gamble on what turns out to be a very high-priced entertainment machine, and I'm very curious to see how it plays out.

They're called games

Finding Neverland is a movie about J. M. Barrie, his life, and his creating of Peter Pan. I always found one of the moments in the movie to be poignant. Frohman, Barrie's producer and financier (played by Dustin Hoffman), is talking to Barrie (played by Johnny Depp) after the failure of a recent Barrie play.

J.M. Barrie: It was never meant to be taken seriously.
Charles Frohman: You know what happened, James, they changed it.
J.M. Barrie: They changed what?
Charles Frohman: The critics, they made it important..., what's it called? What's it called?
J.M. Barrie: Play.
Charles Frohman: Play.

I don't want to get into the fact that seriousness can be, and has been wonderfully done in plays, though certainly it could be, has been, and will continue to be discussed to the end of time (in fact Peter Pan is actually incredibly thought-providing itself). The points are all there to be made, and it's very valid to discuss. It's just a different topic.

Instead I want to talk about a another similarity/parallel that scene has with our industry.

What are they called?

Games.

Games.

When I look at the industry around me I'm often very disappointed, and I think it comes from that singular point.

Games are amusement at heart, they are entertainment. So why is it that so many people seem to not be having any fun? Why is there so much anger and resentment among people playing games? Why is a 'gamer' someone who treats other people with disdain?

Shia LeBeouf: This is how in a simple way you can find out if it's a
gamer you want to play with. Ask them if they have a Wii. If they say yes, get
the f*** out of there.

They're games. Why aren't we having fun?

Why is it that there are fights back and forth over consoles with people going way beyond saying they simply enjoy one console more than other, to attacking the people who play the other consoles?

Belittling the people and their intelligence for playing something you don't enjoy yourself is not a sign of intelligence. In fact it's quite the opposite. Attacking other people on such grounds shows a basic and fundamental lack of respect for other people. I for one look at my industry, the games industry, and our involvement in not only spawning such behavior, but also furthering it, with our own disrespect towards one another, and I'm really disappointed.

Why do we criticize each other for having fun? Why is someone enjoying a different game than us seen as a negative instead of a positive? Why do we feel we are a 'mature industry,' making games that we hope will interest adults, but behaving like mal-tempered children? IGN's

Daemon Hatfield: ...the Wii is stupid...any games that are
coming out for the Wii are going to be dumb.

Perhaps including review websites in the games industry is a bit of a stretch, but it is all furthering the same approach that lacks in intelligent debate, and instead turns to playground name-calling.

In this generation the attitude of malice has been most prevalent in regards to the Wii and its players. (Notably the Wii has received a lot of negativity among gamers who admittedly aren't even playing it. Hatred towards something like a video game console is bad (silly?) enough, but hating the Wii without actually playing it is simply bewildering...but I digress.)

Of course the Wii is just the today example. Last generation the PS2 got plenty of flak with many verbal and written flamefights over the 'type' of people who play it. In our industry it seems that wherever there are people enjoying themselves there are other people trying to pick a fight, or find some other way to stop the fun.

Honestly, I could understand starting a ruckus if there were some life-threatening evil occurring, or the forceful removal of people's rights, or the subjugation of millions, or even the subjugation of one...

...but they're games.

Games, made to be fun, engaging, exciting, challenging, and occasionally mind-opening.

Why is someone having fun with a game you don't like somehow a threat that must be beat down by constant belittling of that person and what they are enjoying?

I'd call on the industry to reconsider its approach and to start enjoying itself a little more. I'm convinced doing so can only positively impact both the sales of games, and the games themselves!

Maybe we can start by discussing things with a little more open-mindedness, civility, and consideration instead of being dismissive, and jumping to name-calling of those who play different games than we do. Perhaps we can stop thinking that someone else's success somehow equals our failure.

People are different, and that's a good thing! If they weren't different we'd all be making the exact same game. Thankfully we have diversity in both the people and the games. But instead of cheering it, the general approach is to despise those who aren't thinking like us. (Just listen to how the console makers speak of their competitors, it's enough to make you wonder if there is any sanity in the world)

I know the same issues exist in just about every industry, but I'm not making movies or talking politics on TV. I'm not involved with those things. I make games.

Games.

If there is any industry in the world that should be having loads of fun, and devoid of hateful behavior and angry attitudes, it's ours.

Indiana Jones and the Staff of Kings

I've been unable to post recently, but wrote-up a psuedo-review of the new Indiana Jones Wii game on my other poorly updated of recent blog.

http://dustfreewii.blogspot.com/

Listening to the Wrong Voice

I'm unabashedly a huge fan of the LEGO games. There are absolutely some problems with them, such as re-spawning you on the edge of a platform after you miss a jump, a location where your character will slide and fall off the edge if you don't immediately move, but overall, they are just good fun.

LEGO Star Wars has been my favorite of the series. Once two games, each with its pluses and minuses, they were made into one game, and it's the best use of the Wii remote speaker yet. Pulling the trigger on your Wiimote and hearing that familiar laser blaster sound emanate from the controller makes me feel like a 6 year old running around outside with a Han Solo blaster in my hand.

The LEGO games have taken their lumps when it comes to reviews, with each new game getting lower review scores than the last. This is partly due to reviewer fatigue and partly due to the developers getting a little of sequelitis. (that's the need we feel to make the next in a series somehow bigger and better than the previous)

LEGO Batman is a game that I just got through GameFly and it's been interesting. The theme is wonderful. As someone who worked at a comic book store through high school and has a big geeky collection, LEGO Batman hits the spot more often than not.

Unfortunately though, it misses the spot a lot more than it should. A few of the problems:
- The game is more complicated than it should be
- The game is more difficult than it should be
- The game tries to be different from other LEGO games more than it should

The LEGO games are great co-op games. I have no idea if they are good as a single-player game, I have never played them alone. Before getting any further, I want to say I think LEGO Batman is also a great co-op game. Good enough that we'll probably get a copy.

The problem with Batman is that it really needs two 'core' players. It's as though the developers decided that they were tired of the nitpicks from reviews and decided to make a game for 20 and 30 somethings instead of a game that kids and adults could play. Within the first 30 minutes, it was clear that my son, who had played through LEGO Star Wars and LEGO Indiana Jones with me wasn't going to be able to play through LEGO Batman without a lot of help.

He runs into problems with platform jumping and Batman is full of jumps, and not just any kind of jumps, but often very difficult jumps. Batman has a power-up that lets him 'glide.' However, it doesn't work like R2-D2 in the Star Wars series, instead he moves with big turns, which makes it hard to change directions. This makes the long glide jumps for Batman often a huge pain.

Added to the gliding issues is the commonality of needing to jump in 3D to small platforms. 3D jumping is at best difficult for the average person. My wife, father and father-in-law have all tried playing 3D games with us at our house and when it comes to having to jump, they immediately hand the controller to someone else. LEGO Batman has this problem in spades, partially because the levels are so dark that it is really hard to see your shadow when jumping, which makes it hard to orient yourself. The other cause of this problem, again, is that there is just a ton of jumping from platform to platform or to safety zone in the middle of giant puddle of deathly goo to the next safety zone. It's something a 'core' player will find challenging and a young or casual player will find impossible.

A new addition to the series is the batarang. This is always available to players and works into many of the puzzles. Holding down the 'B' button and then pointing at the screen will allow you to highlight objects to throw at if they are available. This set-up is clunky and I often forget about it (while my son can't even get it to work). It is a part of why the puzzles in this game get a little frustrating at times (which actually is still probably a step up over Indiana Jones where they felt tedious, but it's still a step in the wrong direction for anyone but a 'core' player).

Overall, it feels like the developer decided to make a game to address the critic's points with previous games in the series, but I think that was a mistake. How many 20 year-olds are bragging about playing a LEGO game? LEGO games aren't made for 20 year-olds!

The critics don't represent the audience of LEGO games. My son does. All changes and improvements should be made with him in mind, not the critics and the people they represent and speak to.

Again I think we'll probably pick up the game, so it's not all bad. In fact the motion controls for fighting are surprisingly satisfying. However, LEGO Batman is a great cautionary tale for developers. A good critique is valuable, but only when the critique represents your audience.

Is gaming relevant to adults?

Gamesindustry.biz just posted a great interview with Jenova Chen (flOw, Flower).

It hit on a lot of points that I've mentioned about the industry in this blog, and it was interesting to see a known industry developer discussing some of the same points I've been thinking about of late in relation to 'adult' gaming.

When talking about games for adults we're not talking about Gears of War (why does a 'M' rating and 'Adult' content make people think a game is for grown-ups?), we're talking about games that 'old' people might like to play, and the issue of making games more relevant to males over 40. Some quotes:

I don't play a lot of new games because I feel that games have to be - for adults like me - more relevant to my life. When you go out to an art gallery or go to see a movie, you're expecting the film [or art] to either inform you on an intellectual level about certain aspects of life or entertain you on a deep emotional level.

I think a lot of games fail to educate you on an intellectual level, and the emotions they evoke are relatively primal. They are too shallow. Games are very good at making you feel excited, feel thrilled, and feel addicted, but these are the feelings that are very primal - that younger kids or teenagers will respond very well to. As adults we expect to feel something more complex and more sophisticated.

Wonderfully stated and I liked the usage of the word 'primal.' It's a word I think I'll have to adapt to, and use more. The danger in such a statement is that by trying to bring awareness to a problem all games tend to get lumped together, and there is the occasional 'core' game that accomplishes what Jenova is talking about, but I'd love to see more ;).

Another quote:

I'm not against the traditional type of feeling that gaming evokes. Empowerment is a great experience. Even Hollywood has the equivalent in those super hero movies. But what I feel [games] are lacking is the complexity of feeling and the other hues of feeling. If nobody tries to evoke these other types of feelings, then the game market will be very limited.

My goal is to make a game that is this complex flavour. It's like cooking. The best food is not just with one flavour, you have a lot of secret ingredients that, when mixed together, create something very unique that you cannot forget. For me, if you play Flower from beginning to end, it is not all just peaceful. It has peace, it has wonder, it has twists, it has despair, and it has a catharsis.

What of course makes Jenova Chen different is that he is actively working to make his vision a reality. Perhaps much like anyone else, he is trying to create the type of game that he wants to play, but unlike much of the industry, I think he's got a much more 'adult' centered focus.

At a minimum, he's increasing the diversity of gaming, and as I mentioned in my last post, I'd love to see more planets of the gaming universe.

I've often pondered why the game industry is over 25 years old, but there are very few 40 year olds in it. I believe with more developers taking the angle of Jenova, there would be more 40 year olds both making and playing games (and that takes nothing away from the younger teen and early 20-something audience, in fact I'd say they are probably much easier to please, which if nothing else ensures games will be made for them until the end of time ;).

Video Games needs a Copernicus

We all know the name Copernicus. He is that guy that found that the Earth wasn't the center of the Universe.

Today we have a similar problem in gaming. There is a certain niche in gaming that seems to believe the gaming universe revolves around them. This is the same group that is angry at the Wii selling in greater numbers than any console ever. This is the same group that that sees casual games as stupid. This is the same group that despite sales (or because of sales?) thinks that no Nintendo game, no wait, actually the statement is broader. It is that no game on any Nintendo platform is any good.

The gaming Universe is big.

In fact, I think we've only started to discover it. We're really stuck in our own solar system currently. I don't think we have an inkling about the galaxy that contains us, and the concept of the Universe is still far beyond our self-obscured views.

The last generation of gamers has become very resolute in thinking that the true base of gaming is their planet of games and that the whole of the gaming Universe is orbiting around them. There is a very dismissive and ignorant point of view seeing things like casual games as being a dark moon orbiting and obscuring people from seeing the wonder of the amazing planet of games that "hardcore" people play. The Wii they see as another moon orbiting and obscuring the beautiful views to their planet as well as cluttering their views of the stars at night. Which stars of course all orbit around the wonderland of "core" games. Someday, they wrongly believe, the people visiting those moons will realize that the moons are just stupid little hunks of rocks orbiting the magnificent, true source of gaming. The euphoric "core" that was the driver of the last generation of gaming.

Of course no innovation is made anywhere else than that motherland, the glorious center of the gaming Universe. How could it be? Being able to play games with your feet or by moving your arms? Gimick! Being able to shoot around a building's edge or through a window in a shooter? Brilliant new innovation!

It's a bit satirical, but I wish it was more satire and less reality to the opinions of those who constantly lash out, laying heresy charges against anyone or anything that suggests gaming doesn't revolve around "core" games.

There is a whole universe out there to be sure, but I believe we're really having trouble finding it. Part of the reason games have had such a hard time maturing, (and I mean really maturing, which is not at all the same thing as increasing the number of M-rated games) is because not just the "core" gamers, but even the majority of the game developers, operate under the belief that there is only type of "true" game fan. The one who thinks that Halo, WW2 shooters, and GTA are something akin to Nirvana, and that those games are clearly the basis for the gaming Universe. It's the center around which everything else orbits.

Until we, as an industry, fully decouple ourselves from this prehistoric approach, we're not going to mature. Copernicus lead to Galileo, and a completely new understanding of how the world worked and our place within our solar system, galaxy and universe. "Core" games are just one planet. They are floating around with other planets and may not even be the biggest or most important planet in their own solar system, let alone in their galaxy or in the gaming universe.

Gaming needs a Copernicus to disrupt the industry with truth, to change the perception of what gaming is. Maybe Nintendo can be it, maybe casual games, maybe something yet on the horizon or a combination of all these things. Actually, based on all the negative remarks made by "core" gamers, maybe the transition is already happening, and it's just the stubborn old ideas that are taking time to change as we don't want to let go of our old beliefs.

Regardless, I'm excited for a new age of understanding and discovery in the world of games. I'm excited to see what new planets of gaming that we haven't even conceived of yet exist just outside of our gaze. As I mature, I look forward with hope, that the industry can expand its horizons and search out new understanding. It's a hope that keeps me making games and playing them, despite a tremendous amount of negative feedback in regards to many of the games I trully enjoy.

More Wii Balance Boards than X360s

Kind of a weird way to look at things, but interesting at the same time.

There were 14 million WiiFits shipped last year. (gamasutra)
Every copy came with the Wii Balance Board.

There were 10.8 Million Xbox 360s shipped last year.
Total 360 distribution sits at 28.45 million shipped. (gamasutra)

So, taking a lookt at that, I would say that it seems well within reason that within the next two years (one?) more people will own a Wii Balance Board than will own a 360.

That's just amazingly impressive and I think underlines just how well WiiFit is selling around the globe.

Looking for the Good

I've pondered a lot of different ways to approach the same subject - the Wii. I've enjoyed the Wii this year more than I've enjoyed any console I've ever owned (...and I been playing since the Atari 2600s, so the list goes back a long ways).

I've considered doing an end of year post about the Wii games that really delighted me this year, but it feels like I'm talking to the wind. The common statement of Wiis gathering dust really makes me sad.

Another angle.
Recently there was an article on Gamasutra about gamers aging and how that would change some of the types of games that would be appreciated as people's tastes change as they grow old. The article was responded to with lots of comments stating that tastes don't change and how stereotypical the article was.

However, it's also full of truth, that's why stereotypes exist. In this case, the fact is that as people, men in particular, age, their testosterone levels drop, which has a direct impact on their desire for the things that desired as adolescents. Some people go on wanting shooters, but as Nintendo and others have seen, many don't and leave gaming altogether. It's really of no surprise that the comments were in large part from people whose tastes haven't changed...it would be expected that the majority of those whose tastes did change simply moved on. They're not commenting, because they aren't playing games. They're the majority of people out there, living as doctors and teachers, businessmen and janitors.

Nintendo and PopCap have discovered that they still like to play games and they are providing games that this group enjoys. Unfortunately, by the old guard of gaming (which turns out to be made up of mostly adolescents), these gamers are some sort of problem that is ruining them, and so hate instead of friendship rules and the Wii gets the hate.

Dust Free Wii
Which leads me back to the beginning. I've never had more fun with any console than I've had with the Wii. Over the course of this year I played well over 350 games. I played a couple hundred for the Mac at my day job (http://www.reflexive.com/), I played well over a hundred for my indie hobby (http://www.gametunnel.com/), I played a dozen on the DS, and I played a bunch more on the Wii (~50).

In the course of doing all this playing, I found a lot of games that I really enjoyed. It's lead me to wanting to share why those games were so great (and once I did share). I've tried to figure out why people don't seem to like the Wii. One thing that's become abundantly clear is that people aren't playing the games that they are complaining about. It's sort of anti-intuitive, but the same people who say every Wii game sucks at Kotaku, don't actually play the games.

The Wii has become an icon to hate.
So there is the real problem, hate. I've called it Wii Hater Bias (WHB) in the past.
How do you make someone stop hating?

It's a topic much bigger than this post or gaming. It floods through every aspect of our lives. I've praised the good in Indie gaming for years and years, and I've become used to people dismissing things without considering them. Though I'm used to it, it still gets under my skin.

When people care, they see the good. That is true in every aspect of life from your relationship with your significant other to the Wii.
When people hate, they see the bad. This is also true in every aspect of life. It's a part of what makes relationships fail and is absolutely why people keep saying there aren't any good Wii games.

It's not that there aren't good games for the Wii. There are. Lots of them.
It's that people hate the Wii to the point that they can't see the good. All they can see the is bad. (and there is plenty of that to be found in every aspect of life if you look for it)

When you look for the worst in people you'll probably find it.
The same is true here.

I find it discouraging and disheartening to think about, and it really makes me sad to think of all the people missing out on things they would like. More so, it just makes me sad that there is so much hate and anger. It's an emotion that doesn't make life better.

As 2009 starts, I hope we find a way to break through some of the hate, bias, and prejudice that keeps people from considering the world they are condemning.

Top Wii games of 2008 [Metacritic]

Metacritic has put together a list of the top 5 Wii games of the year: http://www.metacritic.com/games/bests/2008.shtml

1 - Super Smash Bros. Brawl
2 - World of Goo
3 - MaBoShi: The Three Shape Arcade
4 - Okami
5 - Tetris Party

#3 hasn't been released in the states yet, but looks really interesting...and is likely to show up on Monday, just making the end of the year. Interestingly, after all the maligning of WiiWare, 3 of the top 5 rated games per Metacrtic are WiiWare games. I'm not surprised personally, WiiWare is horribly under-appreciated.

I grabbed the next 5 (well 6) from Metacrtic for the year as well:

6 - Guitar Hero World Tour
7 - Bomberman Blast
8 - Art Style: ORBIENT
9 - Boom Blox
10 - Mega Man 9
11 - No More Heroes

3 of the next 5 are WiiWare titles as well, bringing the total to 6 of the top 10...and Strong Bad, Lost Winds, Dr. Mario and Final Fantasy aren't even on the list.

So point one - WiiWare is under appreciated.
Point two - Innovation on the Wii is under appreciated. From that list of 10 I'd say at least 4 of them are innovative and different than what we are seeing on other platforms (World of Goo, MaBoShi, Art Style: Orbient, Boom Blox).

I've heard complaints that the Wii was supposed to change gaming, but it is failing horribly. I disagree with those sentiments of course, and I think the variety found in the Top rated Wii games is proof of it. (also interesting is the DS list - World Ends with You, Professor Layton & the PSP list Patapon, Space Invaders Extreme).

Notably absent...shooters.
...but I'm really not missing them.
I enjoy the occasional shooter, but I have to say, the Wii Top 5 list is far more diverse and interesting to me than the Top 5 list on either of the 2 shooter consoles.

Record sales! Record layoffs!?

The latest NPD numbers for North America are out and guess what? Video Games have never been hotter or sold more. 2008 is still on pace to be a record year for the industry!

So why is it that every other day we are hearing about layoffs and how the studio closures. Why are they fighting to stay alive when the industry is doing better than ever? Why is everyone so glum?

A few thoughts:
1 - The Party's Over
Over the years Nintendo noticed that the number of people playing games in Japan was decreasing. Doesn't that seem weird to say? More people play games now than ever! ...but what are they playing? Nintendo say in Japan that people played in their adolescence, then stopped, and that the number of kids was not increasing. They saw a highway to nowhere and so they changed strategies assuming the US would follow course.
Interestingly, the US has followed course. Strip out the Nintendo numbers and the industry is down this year by a lot. Those core games like Fable 2, come out, make a big splash and then disappear. The problem is, they cost a LOT to make and they need to have legs. However, there just isn't an audience for them beyond the first 6-8 weeks at retail...and that's for the hits. Costs more to make taken with flat to declining sales = industry in jeopardy. It's not the whole reason, but it's part of the problem. Nintendo adjusted, the industry has been sometimes on the attack against Nintendo, and has become especially so as they start plummeting. It's easier to blame Nintendo for the problems than it is to look at the industry and realize that there just aren't enough gamers who like the old 'core' games to support making them at the current costs. (which btw makes for more than one obvious solution)

2 - The Party's just beginning
Nintendo has opened up the public to gaming like never before. It's an opportunity to experiment and try different things as you have tons of niches that can likely support a game. You don't have only the option of shooters and sequels anymore! If you want to make a game about lacrosse, now is the perfect time! How about a stock market game? Rodeo? Personality testing? It's an opportunity for innovation with a better chance of hitting the mark than in the past (notably it's still pretty low ;)

3 - 3RD Parties are desperate need of some business schooling.
Quick, name a single 3rd party title that was made by the 'A' team at EA, Activision, Take 2, Ubisoft or well, any game developer not called Nintendo? Boom Blox? That wasn't the 'A' team. It was a good game, but not the 'A' team.
So the current cycle is something like this:
Big games from the 'A' teams are coming out on the PS3 and X360
Big game loses money
Little game/shovelware comes out on the Wii
Little game/shovelware doesn't make money because...well it's horrible...
Publisher/Developer claims Wii is destroying the market
Repeat

Why not put the Bioshock or Dead Space or Mass Effect team on the Wii?
(I'm sure you have all kinds of protests in your mind...that's what happens at the big game developer's too, that is why the cycle just repeats over and over instead of being broken)

A final note... Rock Band on the Wii was the top selling version of Rock Band in November. Rock Band 1! Not Rock Band 2 that has been advertised and advertised over and over. You know why? Rock Band 2 doesn't come out on Wii until this week!?
Apparently either EA or Harmonix didn't get the memo that Guitar Hero sells best on Wii. Or they are just stuck in the cycle above? My guess is that they took soo long to release the horribly gimped Rock Band 1 on the Wii that they wanted to give it time to sell and didn't really care that customers were getting a piece of garbage. Apparently the brand value isn't very high and they wanted to horribly damage it? I'm really not sure, but I have to say it was the bone-headed business move of the year.
Instead of building brand on the Wii, what should be the lead platform for Rock Band, EA hurt branding and let Guitar Hero reign supreme. This is especially a bad move in light of the up-coming Beatles game. The Wii is the only console that can boast having an audience who listened to the Beatles in the 60s. So the Wii is #1 for music games and #1 for having an older audience. Do you think EA/Harmonix will bring the Beatles to the Wii first when it comes out? My guess is that the answer is 'no.' ...and the layoffs will continue...

A final, final note...
Can you name one publisher who is putting at least some of it's 'A' platform on the Wii (though perhaps not the 'A' team).
Square Enix...though it's really a long ways off, I expect it will pay huge dividends on the DS and then the Wii. Now if the FF team could get moved over, we might really have something. From one developer at least ;).

In defense of WiiMusic

The game industry needs to grow up.

It's young and as a medium, games provide so many opportunities that aren't being taken.

I think the industry needs the gaming equivalents of Driving Miss Daisy and Life is Beautiful, but increasingly, it seems gamers and game developers, when considering making games that appeal to "grown ups" are limiting themselves to Saving Private Ryan. That narrow-minded approach is perhaps causing players and designers alike to completely ignore one of the most amazing titles of the year, Wii Music.

Movie = Observed, Game = Involved
On the way out of Disneyland last week I was talking to my kids about the new Toy Story ride. The ride is like a video game with 3D screens and a gun (cannon?) that you use to fire at various targets. It's an amazing ride that is a lot of fun, especially for someone who really enjoys games.

I told my 5-year-old that she should tell her Mom all about it, and she stopped me and said "But Dad, you told us not to tell Mom about Movies." It was a great moment for me to stop and think. For her, she couldn't see the difference between a movie and a game. She'd been told many times not to tell Mom about movie endings so as to not ruin the movie, and she thought this game/ride was the same thing.

Of course the ride is nothing like a movie. In describing it, I wouldn't talk about the story, and there is absolutely no way I could ruin it for you because you have to experience it to understand it. While there are some games like movies, I think the greatest strength of games is the fact that they are an 'experience.'

A 'Mini-Rant'
However, it seems that despite interactive being an integral part of games, when attempting to discuss how to make games that tackle more 'grown-up' issues we often limit our approach to that of movies and other observer types of media.

Books, movies and music are all bad comparisons with the whole of what video games offers as a medium. They all make statements to the audience instead of involving the audience in the statement. Interactivity is what gaming offers that makes it the most amazing form of entertainment and media of our time. Interactivity can provide a way for people to experience things and broaden their minds in ways that no other form of media can do. I believe gaming will struggle to be all it can be if we only consider a narrow band of what gaming can be.

Microsoft's Xbox 360 has become the favorite system for gamers. (at least in the US if no-where else) The type of game given the largest advertising budget over the 4 Christmases it's been available, has been amazingly constant:
2005 - Perfect Dark
2006 - Gears of War
2007 - Halo 3
2008 - Gears of War 2
That list I find amazingly disappointing because the approach is all in the same little box. Where Microsoft is putting its top advertising dollars is a very strong statement about who the gaming industry is. I don't want to take anything away from the games, they are great. The problem is, when we look at our efforts to make the industry grow-up or better appeal to adults, placing so much focus on such a narrow slice of gaming, hurts the industry. If we limit ourselves to trying to discuss weighty matters that are of real significance within such a small approach vector, we are condemning video games to a limited role in society.

So why the rant?
After watching E3, I scratched WiiMusic off my 'get' list. I was sure Nintendo and Shigero Miyamoto had lost their collective minds. In the weeks leading to the game's release, I watched the occasional video and read snipits on gamer blogs about the game, trying to grasp what the point was. During that time, it was easy to join the 'haven't played the game, but somehow understand it enough to hate it' mass that seem to define gamers of our day.

The first crack to my shell came from reading a piece from Stephen Totillo on MTV Multiplayer talking about the moment he 'got' the game while playing Every Breath you Take. I'm a fan of Sting and of Stephen's honest writing style, he had me interested.

Then I watched a video from JC Rodrigo on YouTube. I was further interested and thought the game would be worth a try at least and since I had a $25 gift-card to use, so it wouldn't be like a full-priced game anyway.

I've put in over 10 hours on WiiMusic in the short time I've owned it, and I feel like I haven't scratched the surface. It is a game unlike any other I've played, the closest thing that comes to it is WiiFit. (another much misunderstood and much maligned game by "gamers") WiiFit has made me think about myself and my health in a way that I never got out of a movie or any book. By being an experience I was having instead of something I was observing, it much more strongly impacted me.

Another tangent - WiiFit
Simply weighing myself every couple of days and doing simple exercises changed my perception. I became aware of how I balanced my body on my heels and started mentally trying to correct this. I realized how positive an impact exercising (outside of the game) had on my weight. I also had fun in a new and different way. I came to love several of the balance board games and looked forward to playing them for a few minutes as a reward for doing some of the exercises. I didn't play the game daily and play it much less now that I've had it for 6 months, but it has impacted my life. It has changed my perception of myself and my health and has done so by being a video game that pushed the boundaries in a way that made most gamers uncomfortable and has brought it under a lot of scorn. I bristle when I hear such things. If I never play the game again, I can say it impacted my life in a positive way, in a way that no other form of media could, and I'm pretty amazed by that.

So back to WiiMusic.
I've enjoyed singing in choirs and when I was younger I played in bands. I play piano pretty badly, but not horribly (which is how I play guitar). I like music and enjoy a wide variety of it (my interests are far from satiated by the play lists in Guitar Hero and Rock Band). Despite coming from what I thought was a pretty solid music background, WiiMusic made me 'get' music in a way I'd never gotten it before.

The game includes a few music lessons, and in one of them, you play each piece of a band on Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star. It seemed dumb, and I was somewhat affronted by playing such a silly song, but no-one was watching, so I played on. Playing each piece, one at a time, seeing how different they were, and then seeing how it all came together to make something that sounded so rich and full was really amazing to me. All the parts were so diverse, but all the sounds jelled together so well. I of course had understood this concept before, but actually playing every part, made me understand it in a way I never had before. Ever since, as I hear music, I'm picking out the parts and thinking about them in a different way that I can't quite explain other than to say I feel like my mind has been awoken.

Of course that was really just the beginning of my love of WiiMusic. Playing the songs in the game, it turns out, is really a challenge. Though most people I talk to think they get that each part is different, in practice, everyone just waves their remove or presses buttons like a mad fool, creating noise, lots of noise, and very little music that sounds interesting.

Playing a song well, at least my definition of well, which isn't quite Peter Gabriel, but nonetheless pretty intense, is hard, really hard. I played Motzart's 'A Little Night Music' over and over with my wife. Each time we'd finish and either she or I would say that we'd messed up on timing or in rhythm that made one part of the song or another sound garbagy, like we were a band learning how to play together, which in fact is exactly what we were doing.

Then there came that moment, after an hour plus of rehashing and playing the same song over and over again, where we really did jell together. It created the same sensation of accomplishment that I got when doing piano recitals and band concerts years ago. We really sounded pretty good. However, in watching the video, we saw areas where we could do better.

That's just one of the great moments in the game. An even more amazing moment comes as you push past making a particular song sound great and start making it sound like it is yours. That's when my creative side starts tweaking things, changing parts, timing and rhythm. Out of that, something new is created and I feel alive. It's the main reason I make games for a living. I love that feeling. WiiMusic provides an amazing workshop where you can create and tinker in a way that has never been done before, and in a way that only video games can do. It has opened my mind to a new world and left me humming my own favorite remixes of tunes that I created.

For me, I am really saddened by the negative reviews and comments that I've seen by the game. Based on the game's low sales, I'd guess that most of the people commenting about it haven't played it, or if they have, it was a brief experience at a friend's house.

WiiMusic isn't WiiSports. The first little bit may be fun, but it's not immediately accessible in the way WiiSports is. It takes time and experimenting, and a little bit of putting yourself into it to understand it. One I 'got' it, it changed my perspective about what games for adults should be like.

Some games can change the way you think and act by giving you information that you can only learn by experiencing it. WiiMusic did that for me. The fact that games are an experience is one of their greatest strengths! WiiMusic, I think, really capitalized on this.

...and it did it in a mature way, at least the way I think of mature -- that of expanding your thinking and changing your perceptions.

For any who have considered the game but passed on it, I hope you'll reconsider.

Off-topic: Microsoft Movie Maker and making software for the masses

I recently made my first DVD viewable on my TV through my DVD player. The process took nearly a year.

In going through it all, I found myself frustrated at Microsoft for the same reasons I'm always frustrated with them, and wondering why so few people are mentioning the problems I saw (and why there doesn't seem to be a solution through Movie Maker!?).

So the short of the story, we have a miniDV camcorder and I was able to easily bring my video recordings of Disneyland and Birthdays from a single 60 minute tape over to my computer. I thought I was half done in taking my movie from the camera screen to the big screen...but boy was I wrong.

The next step was easy enough, I used Movie Maker to splice up my movie, at cut effects for transitioning and even add some music at different spots to liven things up. I then tried to burn the movie to DVD. You have one option to do this in Movie Maker with not ability to control the quality of the output...and so I burned a DVD and watched the movie and it was, in my personal opinion, horrible. It was agonizing to watch the tape through the camera and see a crisp picture on the screen and then go to Movie Maker and have the movie turned into refuse. I gave up the project for 9 months and started back into it last week...6 hours of web searching and trial and error later I finally had my movie.

So let's get back to where my problem was. It isn't how Movie Maker makes amovie. In fact Movie Maker makes great movies! If you save the movie to your hard drive at a high-quality setting (for some unknown reason you only have that option WHEN saving to your computer) you will find that it comes out looking like a champ. Using Windows Media Encoder 9, you can even create your own profile and save the movie in HD and it will look fantastic. (seriously!)

...but if you try to have Movie Maker save the movie to your DVD, it lowers the quality...and there is simply no-way around it (short of swapping the files that Movie Maker writes to the DVD...while it is writing, a horribly stupid process!).
Using Movie Maker to make your DVD will ruin the perfectly good video you made by lowering the quality with pixelation and somewhat washed out colors. You can't change the save to DVD settings, there is no options to choose or ability to change it. Microsoft wants you to do it a specific way and you will do it the Microsoft way!

This lead me to another tirade about what I call Microsoft's Communistic Commands. Often in the name of helping customers out, Microsoft will decide there is a best way to do things...and then absolutely force that on the customer. For example, ClearType in IE7, which can help the Internet be more readable on monitors using DVI. It is turned on by default despite causing huge problems for anyone not using DVI (I was ill after upgrading and was looking quite desperately for a solution...). Microsoft nonetheless forced this option to be enabled by default in IE7 fearing that if they didn't turn it on by default, people wouldn't know it was there. My opinion has always been that if what you are doing is really valuable, they'll find out about it and use it. At worst an option could have been given during the upgrade process that enabled it by default, but gave the choice to turn it off.

Of course my opinions often don't matter when it comes to the way Microsoft does things. When a communistic command comes down, I can fall in line or get another program (which I have been doing increasingly often). In Outlook, for example, only certain attachments will come through your email. When you get an email with a non-allowed attachment, Outlook will happily tell you that it blocked the attachment, like a dog looking for applause after digging in the flowers. Outlook won't give you any option to access that attachment, even if you were waiting for it desperately. It will just tell you it blocked it and show you the attachment icon for the email that no longer actually has an attachment. You can't go into your options/settings and make it allow that attachment type...no the only solution is to go into your registry and manually allow the attachments.

So when I found that I couldn't change the quality of the output to DVD, I was frustrated...but unfortunately not all that surprised. To reach wider audiences, you have to simplify the interface of programs. For example, giving the customer no options after they click save to DVD. However, when the option to save at different quality levels IS available if I choose to save to the computer, I'm just at a loss.

In the end I was able to make a higher-quality DVD using DVDFlick and ImgBurn after first making the movie in Movie Maker and then saving the high quality version to my PC.

The long process to burn to DVD frustrated and fascinated me as I consider what making software for the masses entails...and what it should entail!

Take it Easy on Me - Difficulty in Games

In finishing up Airport Mania, one of the things that was really a struggle was the difficulty. As the designer/producer of the game, I had played it a bizillion times by the time we were ready to go to beta. I used my scores as the starting baseline of what a 'good' score was to be on a level. (if you haven't played it, every level of the game has 4 skill levels that are based on your level score and are shown to you real-time as you are playing)

After putting together my baseline, we went to beta and I started gathering back in the results of how the players did and of course (for those who have done something similar) I found that most people were scoring about 1/2 to 1/3 of what I scored on each level. The highest score on any level was 60% of my score. Unfortunately I'd set the high scores on each level at 75% of my best scores. There was a pretty big gap.

So of course I moved the score needed to 'excel' down...a lot, and I kept tweaking the score goals all through our 6 week beta. In fact, by the time we released I'd dramatically changed all 4 skill levels at least twice on every one of the game's 84 levels. In the end I thought the game was incredibly 'easy,' but then I had played it a bizillion times.

Once we released I started reading player reviews and found that while some people found the game to be easy, some still found it to be impossibly too hard. I was certainly sad that the game couldn't be all things to all people, it only underscored the difficulty in getting the difficulty level in a game right.

While in hindsight I might have liked to add a second difficulty level, I have to say that I think making the game 'easy' was the right way to err. (honestly, based on sales, I'd say we definitely went the right direction for this particular game)

The similarities between movies and games fascinates me. One great advantage that movies have over games is that they control everything. Everyone watching a movie sees the same thing and regardless of whether the audience understands things or not, the movie will end and resolve the plot (unless the movie is just horrible or trying to be artsy).

Movies don't have to worry about whether or not the people in the theater are of different abilities. The people in the audience don't have to fight to save Endor or to save the White City themselves, it's all done for them. Unless they walk out of the theatre, movie goers get the whole experience from start to end.

Most people who play video games don't go all the way through most of the games they play. I can't count the number of people I've talked who start games, proclaiming their adoration of the title, and yet haven't finished the game...nor do they have any plans of doing so. (and of course I'm a member of this club)

Why don't people finish games? Well it's a topic big enough for 2 semesters of coursework, but one of the reasons people don't finish games is the difficulty.

I was talking to a long-time gamer last week who gave up on Mario Galaxy because they just wanted to play and hated the challenge of the boss fights. My own experience with the horrific 30-minute boss fights in Metroid Prime 3 is similar. I often consult guides and gamefaqs to figure out bosses...I have zero interest in figuring it out...I just want to move on to the next piece of the game. Boss fights are often like that lull in a bad movie when you wish they could just get back to the plot.

Like when I see a movie, I want to see the whole game. I like the story and the set and the characters...there's just parts that don't thrill me. If the game was a movie, I'd wait it out, knowing that a bad scene can only last so long. But in a game, I tend to quit, and the game joins the hundreds of others on my shelf that are unfinished despite how good I thought they were. (how many GREAT unfinished games are there on your shelf?)

Of course...at 34 I'm old for a gamer (as I'm often reminded) and I'm not very good at games (though I was VERY close to cracking the Top 10 in the last Mario Kart Wii Tournament).
I also work increasingly in casual games, which are focused on making it easy for players to immediately play. So clearly I'm biased towards easy...

...but I'm also clearly not alone in my desire. A very healthy percentage of players of Half-Life 2 Episodes 1 & 2 are playing Half-Life on easy! Fairly or unfairly I label Half-Life players as a very hard core group. One that eats wild animals for breakfast and calls a 3-inch cut a mere flesh wound. They're the ninja masters of gaming. ...and nearly 20% of them like their games easy. It's like watching an army field general do ballet in front of his troops. (not that there is anything wrong with that!) It's amazing to see the ninja masters of gaming looking for their games to be easier.

With Airport Mania, I made it easy. Part of that comes from my belief that the majority of people who play casual games are looking for relaxation, not metal taxation. Part of it comes from my own experience in thinking that most games, even those made for kids are much more difficult than they should be. (THQ...seriously? what is up with the difficulty of your games...take a note from Travelers Tales...please!)

A lot of players aren't playing games through to the end. They are giving up very early on. Developers who have played the game over and over don't realize just how much harder it is for the average player to do what has become second nature to those who created the game. I think hard difficulty levels for those who are looking for the challenge and apparently have nothing to do all day but play games are great! Just be sure to include the easy difficulty level when you make your game. I want to see how it ends!

Rant: Innovation - to love, to fear

With WiiWare launching today I've been feeling like a kid again. I only got a short play session with Lost Winds, but I was just thrilled with the innovative game play. I was playing something unique and fun that continually made me smile. However, the truth is that most people won't be playing Lost Winds today or anytime soon because they'll have trouble comprehending it simply because it is so different. They complain that the wind is just a little too difficult to control or wonder why you can't just press jump like EVERY OTHER PLATFORMER for the last 25 years. The point of course is that Lost Winds isn't like all of those other games. It takes what you are used to and changes the play to something you are not used to. I hope that everyone will get a chance to play this little gem, but again, I fear most people will skip it.

From a MSNBC article today on WiiWare:

It's whimsical. It's smart. It's different. But in the games biz, "different" isn't always a good thing.

From running GameTunnel for 5 and a half years now, I have a little experience on the topic of what people think of 'different.' Though I wish they were wrong, I think MSNBC nailed it on the head.

Innovation in games is like 2nd Life. Everyone is always talking about it, but it doesn't make enough money to be anything more than an interesting discussion piece.

That's also the definition of lip service.

Lip service and innovation have become too good of buddies over the last few years. XBLA was supposed to be the Sundance of Indie games. I work for the company that made Wik, one of the first games on the service. I've been told by many people that Wik is still the most innovative title on XBLA. That doesn't surprise me. After Geometry Wars struck it big Microsoft wanted more of the same. Big explosions, mind-number particle effects. I heard that from Microsoft myself as we were pitching our 2nd XBLA title to Microsoft, just 5 months after the 360 had been released. I don't blame MS, they did what every other other company in their place has done. They used the words like 'innovation' and 'indie' to get newspaper noteriety, and then gave the public what was selling well...more of the same games we've been playing for the last decade.

I'm not saying that there isn't any innovation in Halo 3 or COD4 or Guitar Hero 3 or Assault Heros or Undertow or Uno. There is.
But it is a different type of innovation than you get in Lost Winds or in Wik. One is trying to take the familiar and improve it, the other is taking the familiar and making it unfamiliar. Tower of Goo is a great example of this as it takes bridge-building physics and recreates it in a way that feels totally different than any construction game you've ever played with a style that just as unique.

Not lost in all of this is a third type of innovation, which core gamers find the most frightening of all. That is where you take the totally unfamiliar and present it to gamers. It's fodder for another post, but Nintendo has become masterminds at doing this. Which is more innovative WiiFit or GTA4? It's apples to oranges, but if you are looking for something that is totally unlike what you've been playing, WiiFit is what you are looking for. GTA4 is innovative in the sense of taking what you know and making it better. WiiFit gives you an experience unlike any other game yet released.

As much as we love to talk about innovation, my experience tells me core gamers are scared to death of it because it doesn't look like what they are used to. Innovation looks like WiiFit, and core gamers just don't know how to react to it other than to attack it the same way they would an alien in Halo.

Increasingly I find myself not only frustrated at companies like Microsoft who are using 'Innovation' and 'Indie' to meet their own goals without providing what I think of as innovation, but I'm also frustrated at the gamers who pass over interesting games like Wik and who instead of loving the new gameplay offered by the Wii have long lists of reasons why they hate it.

I'm hoping, as I have for many years in running GameTunnel, that gamers will give innovative WiiWare games a chance and that games like Lost Winds and Tower of Goo will sell by the bucketload. I've been doing GT long enough to make me to recognize the truth in what MSNBC said, but I hold out hope for gamers embracing the unfamiliar and innovative works of those who are setting out to truly give us a different experience. The fact that the Wii is selling better than any console in history gives me hope that maybe this time, innovation will be embraced and that everyone will be able to enjoy these uniquely fun experiences.

Does the Picture on the Box Matter?

I'm a big fan of what Nintendo is doing. I think their focus on Innovation and Fun is right on the mark. So, I rarely make any effort to note where they are missing the mark, but with WiiFit mania soon to come upon in the US, I can't help but think Nintendo has made a mistake.

The box on the right is what WiiFit looks like in Europe and Japan. I love it. It says so many things without cluttering up the box. The sense of exercise is quite strong, with a focus on silhouettes.

This box is the US Box. I think it is a disaster.

Why?

The box says toy.

I think a lot of the success that Nintendo has had in the US, which of the 3 regions appears to be where it has the most success, has been due to the Wii being purchased by many groups of people. This box tries to capitalize on that by putting many groups of people on the box. There is a problem with doing that. By putting everyone on the box, you for sure put something on the box that makes someone feel like they don't relate.

In this case I think the box makes the Wii less mainstream and more kid. It feels more like boardgame boxes from 10 years ago that had the family all around the game smiling. There is nothing wrong with that image, but it does preselect a specific group. In this case, it selects against people who want to pull the game out with their older friends. A group of all 40 year or 20 year olds doesn't want to pull out a board game at their party where on the box half of the people are kids. By putting faces to the box you've started selecting groups, which makes some people feel less inclined to be involved.

The Japan box doesn't have these issues b/c it skipped them entirely. The US box is likely to make Mom just a little more likely to refer to the Wii as a kid's toy...which is exactly the opposite of the message that Nintendo has been successfully conveying for the last 18 months.

I'm sure the US will still sell many copies of WiiFit, but I worry that if this approach continues, that the Wii will become a kid's toy in the US, which will ultimately keep it from reaching the marketshare it could otherwise reach.

The recent ads for Mario Kart Wii, only serve to make me more concerned that Nintendo of America may have lost its way when it comes to marketing their very popular console.

Casual Games & Manifestos

I read through The Casual Games Manifesto on Gamasutra today and I got all the way through despite wanting to respond immediately to some of what I saw. I guess I'm a little jaded and I'm sure it didn't help in my reading comprehension.

I do agree with one underlying point of the article, you should use the portals in the casual games market to create customers for you if you are a developer. I talked about it at length at the GDC last year, and it continues to be true! ...and there is a whole additional market-place that developers aren't taking advantage of...but should...and it's a topic for another day.

One of the issues that I had with the article is the difficulty in creating customers from the portals. The portals clamp down hard on anything that looks like a link to another website or a service running on another server inside the games they offer. I'd be surprised if you could find a way to get much traffic from them that way.

The other issue I have is an on-going one that isn't exactly in the article. So the above is officially the end of my critique, and now I'm moving onto an almost related rant...

That second issue I have is the assumption that it is easy to get traffic or build up a website. Honestly, I worry that most developers, since they don't do websites, presume it is easy to create a huge website...just because they don't have any experience.

It brings to mind a favorite Dilbert comic:
Dilbert's Manager says "I put together a timeline for your project. I started by reasoning that anything I don't understand is easy to do."
"Phase One: Design a client-server architecture for our worldwide operations."
"Time: six minutes."

I can see Dilbert's stunned look on his face, unsure of what to say next.

Let's consider this for a moment.
How hard do you think it would be to create and run slashdot.org?
How about msnbc.com?
How about espn.com?
How about bigfishgames.com?

According to compete.com and collaborated by alexa.com (except alexa groups espn with go.com...) bigfishgames.com is the biggest of those sites. Stop and think about that for a minute...

That amount of traffic and what it takes to create and keep up a website of that size is ANYTHING but trivial. Creating and keeping that up is amazing. The type of thing that teams of people spend millions of dollars on and fail at most of the time. I'm not writing this to build up BFG, who we compete and cooperate with, but to just point out how enormous the task is of building up traffic like the portals have. The middlemen are middlemen because they are good at it. I encourage everyone to take on the market to the best of their abilities of course, but I wouldn't under-estimate the task.

...and back on point, I strongly agree with the point that you should try to steal the portal's traffic and re-route them to you and that you should build up a reason for that traffic to stay with you. I don't know that you can build a service into your game, but that doesn't mean you can't create a community of games that can be broken into separate pieces and sold through the portals for some name recognition...and maybe include some reasons for players to go looking for you :).

Daikatana & Airport Mania?

The programmer who I've been working with on Airport Mania sent me the following image as a gag, which considering the light-hearted nature of Airport Mania contrasted with Daikatana's in-your-face approach only makes it all the more funny. I couldn't resist but to share :). If you're not familiar with Daikatana's famous ad, check it out here.

Incidentally, Airport Mania is set for limited release (meaning it's only available in one place - http://www.airportmania.com/) this Thursday April 10th, with a full release through Reflexive.com on the 14th and your favorite portal in the coming weeks! :)