CHEGheads Blog

Thinking Outside the (Console) Box

Posted by Marc Check - 07/24/09 at 09:07 am

In my last blog you read about OnLive’s new streaming games-on-demand service (now in beta, expected to be launched in winter 2009). That entry discussed OnLive’s potential for changing the way games are played, which got me wondering about the possibilities for changing how games are developed and distributed.

OnLive claims that the market is ripe for games-on-demand service because there is a trend of “unprecedented innovation, creativity, and expansion within the video game market.” This is easy to agree with. The growth of the industry has been remarkable over the past decade, despite the recent recessional slump in video game sales (which sank over 30% in June 2009). This recent slump may be more reflective of the economic inability of households to purchase consoles as opposed to the games. It can also be attributed to the lack of blockbuster releases in the recent past and the reluctance to spend money on sub-par (or the same old) games.

For those who already own consoles or other internet-connected devices, the amount of games available to users has grown, and in some cases dramatically. Take the Apple iPhone, for example. In July of 2008 there were less than 1,000 apps available for download. Compare that number with the present day where 60,014 apps are available for download (with 10,085 of them being games). The PlayStation Network has a relatively modest 200 games available for download, and X-Box is promising an on-demand game download service in August of 2009 with a meager 30 titles at launch (and at full retail pricing). The rate of development of games for the iPhone indicates that there is a growing demand for affordable, downloadable games. The PlayStation Network has recognized this as well, releasing independent games outside of their standard commercial network.

Now don’t get me wrong…. I know there’s an extreme difference between an iPhone game and Call of Duty. But if Apple has proven one thing, it’s this: If you make it easy to develop and distribute games, more people will do so. This not only means more games, but it also means greater creativity and diversity in the gaming world. Peruse this recent list from IGN of the top ten must-have games from the PlayStation Network and you’ll find games that wouldn’t stand a chance in commercial distribution channels. One such example is Flower, and I recommend the following behind-the-scenes video to grasp the full concept and uniqueness of the game.

OnLive already boasts partners such as Electronic Arts and Ubisoft, but I truly hope that their service proves successful and opens the door for independent game developers in the same way that Apple and PlayStation have with their downloadable game services. It seems to me that a subscriber service that offers a constantly changing and diverse palette of games will prove more recession-proof than the classic console/blockbuster structure that still dominates the market today and will result in more fun for the end-users.

July 24, 2009 | Leave a Comment

Graphic Violence as a Motivator for Game Players?

Posted by Eric Wheeler - 07/16/09 at 08:07 am

Death Race Screenshot

The debate over violence in video games is one that has shadowed, and at times nearly overshadowed, the electronic games industry (despite the fact that they account for a relatively small percentage of the game market). When did all this fuss begin and where has it led?

Exidy Ever since Exidy Inc. released Death Race—a mid-1970s arcade game where players steer pixilated race cars around a graveyard in an attempt to run down undead monsters—there has been increasing public concern about the impact of video games on those who play them, especially children. The game, as pictured below, seems rather innocuous by today’s standards, but at the time it broke new ground, in a new media.

Mortal Kombat

Later, arcade fighting games, such as Mortal Kombat, and PC first-person shooters, such as Doom, both released in the early 1990s, raised the ante with much more realistic graphic violence. Senate hearings followed, as did the independent rating system established by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB). Recent game franchises like Grand Theft Auto and Halo ensure the debate will go on.

All of this fuss leads to the oft-asked question: Do electronic games inspire violence? Surely the intense graphic violence players experience in the games leads to violence in the real world. Or does it? Don’t worry; I’m not going to attempt to answer that question here in a blog. However, it is useful to consider whether or not violent content motivates game players.

A 2009 psychological study conducted at the University of Rochester looked at this exact subject. This type of research is germane to any discussion on violent content.

Andrew Przyblski, a university graduate student and lead author of the study, explained that “for the vast majority of players, even those who regularly play and enjoy violent games, violence was not a plus.” Przybylski added that, “violent content was only preferred by a small subgroup of people that generally report being more aggressive. However, even these hostile players did not report increased pleasure when playing more gruesome games.”

The study also revealed that through the use of “two online surveys and four experimental studies, people stayed glued to games mainly for the feelings of challenge and autonomy they experience while playing. Both seasoned video gamers and novices preferred games where they could conquer obstacles, feel effective, and have lots of choices about their strategies and actions.”

These elements, said study coauthor Richard Ryan, a motivational psychologist at the university, represent “the core reasons that people find games so entertaining and compelling. Conflict and war are a common and powerful context for providing these experiences, but it is the need satisfaction in the gameplay that matters more than the violent content itself.”

The issue of violence in electronic gaming is indeed a complicated one, but it is useful to remember that reactions to these games parallel reactions to earlier shifts in media—motion pictures, comic books, and television. And by looking at what motivates gamers to play, I believe we can begin to cast a light on the issue of graphic violence.

As the NCHEG collection grows, it will continue to acquire titles that cross all gaming genres, from first-person shooter to real-time strategy games to casual games. What motives you to play? Does a gremlin’s squeal cause your hair to curl? Or are you a proud member of the “doom clones” sub-culture? Let us know what motivates you to play.

July 16, 2009 | View Comments

Playing in the Stream – OnLive’s New Gaming Service

Posted by Marc Check - 07/11/09 at 11:07 am

4_07-19sgl_stream This could be the game-changer…
or perhaps not.

I’ve been following the news about OnLive with great anticipation. OnLive, if you haven’t already heard, is launching a high-performance, streaming service that could be the first of its kind to offer a true online gaming experience previously relegated to PC or console play. Let’s face it—one of the biggest limitations to gaming is the choice of platform, and the affordability of each. Having an X-box 360, PS3, and a souped-up gaming PC at home isn’t a reality for most of us (despite my insistence to my spouse that it’s a necessity). And even if you are lucky enough to have all of those, each console will be succeeded every few years by a newer, faster, better model and gaming PCs are constantly demanding more power achievable only OnLive MicroConsole though incremental and expensive upgrades. If OnLive lives up to the hype, consumer money previously shelled out for new hardware can be put to better use if gamers subscribe to their service. OnLive will stream platform-agnostic games over the Internet. The user needs only a PC, Mac, or OnLive MicroConsole to receive the streaming signal and render the graphics.

marc_ralph2 This isn’t the first time the idea of games-as-a-service over a network has been considered, and a few examples exist today (albeit at a much lower-performance standard). No, this idea was born a half century ago when Ralph Baer, inventor of what became Magnavox Odyssey, first created his Brown Box. As fellow blogger J.P. Dyson and I discussed the history of the prototype console with Baer during his visit, one point stood out to me as incredibly poignant and interesting: as early as the late 1960s, Baer was trying to sell the idea that video-game service could be offered by cable companies as they became commonplace in homes across America. Needless to say, and despite some significant interest from one particular cable company, this method of delivering early games such as Pong did not come to fruition.

onlivegames What is significant, however, is that the early history of video games may have looked quite different if gaming had been sold as a cable service. Instead, the home-console-based method of play that began decades ago became the standard for game delivery. I often wonder if games had been reliant on cable service, would that have hindered the growth of the market? After all, it wasn’t until twenty-plus years later that data was being regularly delivered to homes over another infrastructure outside of the cable television networks (that being the Internet), and even at that point with fairly limited bandwidth. Of course, it is the question of reliable and sufficient bandwidth that has skeptics speculating on the potential success of OnLive’s games-on-demand service.

If OnLive is a success, aside from platform independence, it could also mean significant changes in how games are developed and distributed (which I’ll elaborate on in a future blog). In the interim, I’d be interested to hear other opinions concerning the potential success of this service, given the bandwidth limitations of most ISPs. Have you seen a demonstration of the service? Have you been lucky enough to participate in the closed beta? We’d love to hear your opinions. Until then, here’s to hopes of playing together “in the stream.”

July 11, 2009 | View Comments

NCHEG Welcomes Videotopia to Strong

Posted by Eric Wheeler - 07/07/09 at 10:07 am

Prior to the museum opening of Videotopia, I was assigned to “test” the vintage arcade games that were arriving as part of the exhibit. That’s right—I got paid to play arcade games for the better part of a week. I know what you are thinking, but this is research. At least that’s what I keep telling everyone.

computerspaceyellow[1] It’s hard work navigating virtual asteroid fields, battling predatory insects, and saving the planet from pixilated alien invaders, but someone had to ensure the games were running properly. It is all in a day’s work at NCHEG. And the best part is, I had an unlimited stash of tokens to play everything from Space Invaders to Robotron: 2084 to Virtua Racing.

As NCHEG curator, I found it both fascinating and informative to play a number of the culturally significant games that predated my own gaming experience, including Computer Space, the first coin-operated arcade game. I even got to play a round of Pong against NCHEG Director J.P. Dyson during an interview with a Russian television station. He won, but my pride wasn’t damaged too badly because Pong—or at least the Atari home version I remember playing—was never one of my favorites growing up.

Vector Game Now had he beaten me on Galaga, Joust, or Atari’s vector classic Star Wars, that would have been a different story. These were the games I prided myself on having mastered in my youth, so it was with great satisfaction that I piloted my X-wing fighter down the trench and destroyed the sinister Death Star with my very first token some twenty years after I’d last played the game.

Gaunlet As much as I enjoyed battling Darth Vader and the dark side of “The Force,” that was nothing compared to my addiction to Atari Games’ Gauntlet. I loved this game. For those not familiar with it, Gauntlet is a simultaneous four-player game where each player controls a different character (Warrior, Wizard, Valkyrie, Elf), each with distinct skills. While the game has no set objective, players navigate a mazelike dungeon, engaging in close-quarter combat along the way with hordes of ghosts and demons. The key to success was cooperation among players, and I remember lengthy strategy sessions with my friends as we waited in line—often a long line—for our turn to play at a local mall’s arcade.

paperboy-3[1] Playing Gauntlet again certainly took me back to my younger years (all I needed was a jean jacket, plastic comb for my back pocket, and a Duran Duran cassette to complete the experience), but Videotopia goes beyond the nostalgic in its effort to highlight significant games in the video-game industry and explain the context in which they were created. It’s truly a fun and informative experience.

Now, you’ll have to excuse me. Each day I head down to the exhibit gallery with a handful of tokens to conduct an additional round of research. I’m off now to try to break my high score on Paperboy.