Video Gaming

A $99 Xbox? More Than Meets The Eye . . .

by

OK so Microsoft’s launching a $99 X-Box with Kinect. Sure you then need to pay a subscription fee (which comes with access to XBox Live Gold), but you also get a warranty.

So that throws things back into Sony’s part in the price wars on their aging platforms. I think it’s got a few interesting repercussions beyond that:

  • It’s pretty smart pricing – totally you’d pay $29 for the subscription model, but you also get a lot of benefits. Microsoft may be trying some new plans that won’t just be for this system – but for the next.
  • As it’s a two year plan, my guess is we won’t be seeing a new XBox for 1 1/2 to 3 years.  If you’re developing for XBox, breathe a sigh of relief – but not if you just started a new project.
  • This is an experiment. How it pans out will be watched by others – and responded too.  Pay attention.
  • It reverses common methods of pricing game systems – and merges them with online services all-but-totally.  If you work in gaming, pay attention (and notice how Microsoft is even more of a gatekeeper).

– Steven Savage

Tween Girls Double Gaming Time?

by

Who’s doubled their game playing time per month this year? Tween girls, according to a study.

This intrigues me as this is a market NOT typically associated with gaming, and oft associated with shovelware and secondary works. There are some standouts for tweens, as noted in the article, so I’m wondering if this will affect development for the demographic.

In fact, if it does, who knows what surprises may come up. “My Little Pony” was intended for a younger female core audience, and we know what happened.  Wizardry 101 was intended for a younger audience and it was a hit in an older demographic.  Those working to appeal to this growing demographic may find a lot of surprises.

– Steven Savage

Non-Gamers Should Care About Gaming

by

Venture Beat had an unusual article on why non-gamers should care about gaming. It’s a pretty interesting read, but what’s really interesting to me is the very idea itself.

As a gamer, I take the existence of my hobby and its industry for granted. I also assume, rather ignorantly, that there’s a certain barrier between me and non-gamers, even if it’s changing. That’s a given, a cultural assumption.

Of course as the article notes, it’s not true. Gamification, causal games, more games, etc. really do blur (and destroy) the gamer/non-gamer boundary. This boundary breaching is probably happening faster than many crusty old gamers like me may realize because of casual, mobile, and geek being chic.

So now that I’m actually thinking outside of the shrink-wrapped box, what do I see coming up in the gaming/non-gaming boundary:

  • Goodbye to boundary in the next 5-10 years. The only reason not to game will be because you don’t have access to the technology or the time. But gaming will be very omnipresent.
  • Design meltdown. Once gaming is so widespread, with more audiences than it’s used to, designing games is going to be more challenging. What demographics will game designers run into that they never encountered before?
  • Getting more businesslike. Gaming has had many a moment of not-exactly-professionalism. When it’s more widespread, that’s going to have to change. Expectations for businesses, of performance, of support, will alter.

What does it mean for future and current gaming professions:

  • If you’re not thinking out of the box you’re not moving ahead. Get ready to embrace a less bounded game world.
  • Act professional. It’ll make sure you survive and it’ll be expected.
  • Stop making the same damn game. Your audience has changed.

– Steven Savage