What will be the new Sofa!

                For my last entry (this semester flew by!) I wanted to part with an idea on the future of gaming consoles.

                As we discussed in class, virtual worlds have encroached their way into our lives and will continue until the PS9 is possible (if you don’t know what this is than google it, it was a commercial for the PS2) This made me think of our discussion on the Steam console (which would only be great because of their sales!) which may have been false at the time, but it is an interesting question to ponder. How else can games creep into our lives?

                I saw an episode of 30 Rock a couple of weeks ago and Alec Baldwin’s character Jack pondered how he could get closer to his customers. His answer, the sofa! In the show he works for Kabletown (cable company) and his bright idea was to sell expensive sofa to people, it’s his way to bring back his accomplishments from his time at GE. He figures if he already controls what they watch, on what they watch it on, and the times they watch it, what other experiences are there? Obviously it was quite a comical way in which he came to his answer, but none the less he makes a good point. For gamers, or just people really, virtual worlds are all around us in just a few decades and the expansion is not slowing down in the slightest.

                While many are speculating the companies to reflect on the current generation’s lack of new sales versus used and the rise of digital distribution there is another area that is growing.

                Media Incorporation on consoles shares Jack’s ideas on Sofas. Companies are adding new applications for the other arts like music, movies, and tv. Just recently Microsoft has released apps for cable television networks like Xfinity and Dish as well as paid orders for MLB network and HBO. For now they are simply ports, but if they follow in the path of Netflix soon these applications might be full features. As well more and more social apps are being added. This year has seen the addition of Youtube stations to Xbox and Amazon Viewer to PS3.

                Soon (well currently, if Xbox had a newer interface that is) there would be little reason to ever turn on anything else but a game console to listen to music, watch a tv show, or to do what it was meant to originally, play a game. What’s left to wonder about what the 720 or ps4? It’s clear that they will continue to broaden their horizons.  Some trails have already begun with the Playstation Vita as Sony is definitely attempting to break newer grounds (even if it takes them a while.) The console relys almost exclusively on digital downloads and has such very interesting features like NEAR (it allows Vita owners to see what other vita’s are doing within a couple miles of you) All these consoles are looking to keep players sitting (or standing depending upon the game) on their console and not the competitors, which for the first time is not just other game consoles.

                 The one thing I hope is that the motion control wars will be over. But with the “success” of the Kinect, Microsoft will most likely try to keep that incorporated. If anything I hope that games will learn from the Playstation Move. Of the 3 current gen, the Move is actually the most satisfying. Maybe if the new cycle incorporates something with the Kinect and the Move, there might be a way for other mediums to interact with the new technologies other than to turn a console on.

                While we will have to wait most likely 2 more E3’s before we hear anything of substance I can only hope that whatever the new direction is they will find their Sofa fast so they can go back to focusing on games. The one thing I do want more of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0KTUysrwgQ and less http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OnDizZ7UT0

                Does anyone else have any different suggestions for what they think the future will hold? Do you want more media’s available from one source or do you just want your console to play games?

The life of an Icon

                Everything has its icons. Movies will have their Marilyn Monroe’s and George Lucas’. Music has their Beethoven and Hendrix. Art has their Van Gogh’s and Banksy’s. What do Video Games have? Elves, plumbers, and Hedgehogs. When you preview a genre from the most popular icons, it is no wonder video games were taken as such a joke for such an extensive amount of time. It isn’t until one really pierces through the surface to truly understand what video games have to offer. One list by Empire.com lists their top 50 video games icons ever. In their list they rated Mario behind Gordon Freedmen for number 1. But what is it that makes this list matter? It’s the experiences that are attached to every one of them. Therefore people are attached to those experiences, not the icon itself. Players have taken to their controllers and symbolically forced that character through a generally harrowing adventure of a lifetime. But when it comes to game icons their road has not been without their bumps. Constantly people are raveling in their seats to the torture developers have bestowed upon their favorite icons.

                Icons for games are increasingly growing. I would even argue that the rate of expansion has been exponentially faster than any of the other arts as Video Games are relatively new and are largely at the center of pop-culture (see the WoW episode of South Park, a show that is based entirely off pop culture.) People will follow their icon more readily so than they are to pick up a new franchise. With an arena growing rapidly it makes sense that there has been nothing but sequel after sequel recently.  A franchise wants more money and will take beloved characters and place them in entirely new directions.

                Companies like Capcom have recently decided to branch out to American developers to handle reboot of their franchises. One example is the Resident Evil series in which they recently gave rights to Slant 6 to develop Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City. To this news many players were apprehensive and gamers were ultimately underwhelmed by it after release. The real question now is why people were disappointed in it. Why would prestigious websites like Gamespot award the game with ratings of 4.5? Because it wasn’t in the tradition of Resident Evil.

                Gamers want their icon to live on so they can experience them again in new setting and such. But at what point does an icon hurt a franchise? In RE:ORC players don’t assume the roles of the traditional characters, instead they are given the chance to killer characters like Leon and Clair. While that is appeasing it isn’t the same adventure that Capcom could produce.

The same could be said about companies that go in different directions for older icons. Nintendo is extremely knowledgeable in this area.  Link, Samus, Mario, Kirby, and crew have been through so many direction changes that it’s hard to keep up with all of them. In the most recent adaptions Nintendo has been trying to make its icons friendlier to anyone of all ages. A perfect example is Kirby’s Epic yarn. A game where Kirby is transferred to a world of yarn and everything is based on that gameplay mechanic. While it was a fun game and was praised quite well, it lacked any sort of challenge. This caused a rift between gamers who are used to the old days of vacuuming up baddies and taking their abilities to those who wanted change of pace. Nintendo has been around in the industry for quite some time and it makes sense that people who grew up on their games now have children of their own and they want their children to have an experience as they did. But is this rift worth it to the companies? With companies like Nintendo increasingly hemorrhaging money it can only be hoped that these drastic changes be stopped.

While many of the above icons have been adapted either by different companies or developers, there are several cases in which just one developer will ruin an icon for many people. The most recent case is Mass Effect 3. Since 2007 players have building their own story with their won Shepard in Mass Effect 1. When the conclusion in Mass Effect 3 passed there were more than a few angry gamers. In two different cases gamers rallied together to start up a fundraiser for the organization Child’s Play to raise $80,000 dollars to change the ending of the game. Later $1,000 dollars was raised to purchase 402 red, green and blue cupcakes for the BioWare office. Finally on April 5^th BioWare announced that they would release a free DLC that wouldn’t change the ending, but would give a cinematic cutscene that would explain more.

In a list by IGN.com they asked viewers of the site to poll their most disappointing gaming icons. The list included several reputable franchises like Tomb Raider and Sonic, but it was the number one spot that was surprising: Master Chief from Halo. Many people love Master Chief but IGN argued that he is “just a generic action hero riding on the coat tails of a much better game.” In that case they were referring to Gordon Freedmen, the number one listed icon on the Empire.com list. They also state Halo’s source of popularity is mostly in its online multiplayer and the theme song at the main menu.

With issues in the gaming world and just the world in general, what’s a company to do to create the best new sequel (Call of Duty 1million and 1 anyone?) And it is not only the gamers who suffer, but also the icon that have been building their legacy for years. It just goes to show that it is still a cutthroat business whether it’s from the creative or a development angle. What does anyone else think? Have any of your icons been transformed into generic identities?

Top 50 Ranked source:

http://www.empireonline.com/features/50-greatest-video-game-characters/default.asp?film=19

Top 10 Disappointments source:

http://stars.ign.com/articles/976/976353p1.html