The Games Industry thread.

[Darkstar]

There's a federal proposal to make the FTC patrol/enforce the current ESRB gaming recommendations. It's doesn't seem like a bad proposal, if game sales have to be regulated, or at least, regulate *certain* game sales (ie, the M-17 and T-13 sales). This doesn't have the problem with the First Amendment that most of the other laws trying to regulate game sales have, because the ESRB has an actual process (as well as a review process for revising) on how a game gets its rating.

However, since this would mean any retailer selling any game that is rated anything other then E (Everyone) or E-7 (Everyone 7 and up) would have to card the purchasers of games, and since most teens won't have a legal picture ID, that would seem to push all games into the Everyone or AO-18 ratings. After all, the retailers wouldn't be able to card a 14 year old, and it would be a rare 17 year old with a drivers licences. Would have an interesting effect on mainstream gaming content, I think. Of course, this still won't stop younger kids from playing "GTA 13: Viagra Mafia" but it does make it more likely that the parents would have had to buy the game in the first place and therefore been more aware that it was "age inappropriate".

[Darkstar]

I've played Darwinia. It's a fairly good game to play through, although a little short. It's a fairly simple RTS. Considering Introversion's previous game of Uplink, I had been somehow expecting something a bit more different. Has potentional. I keep meaning to go check out the fan sites and see what new levels they've cooked up, but keep getting distracted with other games.

[Darkstar]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I think that's the best solution for now. For starters, which gamer isn't connected to the Net? The developers can make more $$$ while selling the games at a lower price at the same time, just because the middleman is removed from the picture.

Then hosting a Web site is dirt cheap compared to running ad campaigns in game rags. There are a bunch of things the publishers can do to attract players, with Stardock being a very good example. They just need to be friendly to the big gaming sites such as Poly...

Well, the figure of how many gamers are not on the net is somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of them. A lot of gamers just do not like to get on the net.

Second, if you are actually successful in the wrong ways with your self-published game, you can put yourself out of business. Bandwidth costs, while cheap, can quickly mount up in cost against you as you have to provide a bigger pipe. Or rather, as your host site provides it for you.

Of course, there are ways around that. For instance, getting StarDock to distribute your product. Or make arrangements with other providers. Although you might be surprised at how much "reputable" hosts take out of your sales.



OOPS! Sorry about the hat trick. I meant to put this in with the Darwinia post above, not add a third reply... Just not paying enough attention.

[duke o' york]

Can I suggest http://www.ogame.org ?

[child of Thor]

No dont - its teh evil

@Darkstar - thanks for those good snippets And the bandwidth requirements for a too succesfull self-published game was not one i'd thought about before.

Here in the uk ref the liscensing/age rating thing, i just dont think most adults are aware of game content these days, maybe compared to when they were younger. And i find it hard to see any system that will really help younger kids not see stuff maybe they shouldn't. It never worked for the video rental/sales side of the movie industry. Probably just more publicity like GTA has caused, might eventualy make parents want to watch what their kids are playing on their shiny new consoles?

[child of Thor]

It seems for every study saying there is not link between violent computer games and extra violent behaviou in kids, you get a study saying the opposite

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4594376.stm

before this became a big topic with games like GTA etc, i always thought there could be a link although it will be difficult to prove. The way i look at it is that familiarity with a certain behaviour, is bound to make you more comfortable with that behaviour. Maybe something like you get in military training - shooting all those distant targets, so when it comes to the crunch you just see the enemy as another target? something like that.

[DrSpike]

Well I've played more games than most and am not at all violent. This study conclusive proves there is no link.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DrSpike
Well I've played more games than most and am not at all violent. This study conclusive proves there is no link.

playing violent video games causes people to spam wildly at internet gaming forums

[child of Thor]

at LotM


@Dr.Spike,

In the primal desire to be 'number one'(to get a mate etc), you have proven yourself violent at winning 'name the game' thus you are violent, or else you wouldn't want to be in the lead of that competition


ok i'm talking out my arze

I think this was a recent study on kids and followed their behaviour patterns. They were more 'likely' to show violent behaviour patterns. I suspect it was more difficult to ferment these patterns in your age group(and definately mine), with the types of games we played as kids due to pixel limitations?

But this is my theory - and might not fit everyone.

[Sandman]

Games are no more gruesome than any other media. The problem is the perception that violent games are somehow aimed at children. They have a big 18 plastered on them.

[child of Thor]

and parents dont seem to be 'policing' their use. Its a tricky situ. I wouldn't want my kids to watch 'Texas chain saw massacre'(although as an adult it is a good film of its type), neither would i want them to play many of todays games - both are examples of when 'graphic' violence is too explicit imho.

Maybe parents have just been aware of the cute platform mario games of the 80's+90's, and have not been keeping up with the recent changes in computer game entertainment?

[Sandman]

That's pretty much it. Society still hasn't quite come to terms with games yet.

Games haven't helped themselves by shying away from adult themes that don't involve ultra-violence.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


playing violent video games causes people to spam wildly at internet gaming forums

There is some evidence of this, but it is not conclusive. My study did find clear evidence of a correlation between high levels of gaming and high post quality though.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by child of Thor
and parents dont seem to be 'policing' their use. ?

Its harder for the average Jane Mommy to police their use. Movies, like you put in the DVD player and you watch them. They carry the same ratings that theater movies have had (here in the USA) for like 40 years. Some parents dont care and let their 8 year olds watch R rated movies - some are a lot more conservative - but in either case they know what theyre dealing with. And just about every parent in a developed country has watched lots of movies.

Games are another matter. Most parental adults have at most a limited exposure to electronic games, esp the mothers. The rating system is not something a nongaming parent is likely to be familiar with prior to the issue coming up with their kids. And you really have to get into some games to see whats really going on.

And of course games are interactive. You watch a violent movie, you arent taking the role of the gunman and firing at things. Whether that really makes games more likely to impact their users I dont know (frankly I AM more concerned about the junk in movies and songs then about games) - but it certainly adds another dimension in the societal reaction.

Oh, and of course in a video store, you have a section where the "action" movies are. You have equal or bigger sections for the dramas, romantic comedies, etc. Making it clear to anyone that violent movies != movies. Games, OTOH, you go into a game store and a huge percentage of whats out there is violent, gruesome etc. The city builders, Mysts, Sims Games, dont make a big enough impression to offset that image.

[child of Thor]

Edit: i felt guilty about that shameless plus1 - so decided to edit this post rather than do a new one

An interesting article here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4587902.stm

not so much that it predicts grimmer takings for game companies going the 'graphics are whats important' route(as in the new consoles) - as i've been mumbling that for years as a reason for a decline in the games industry. Not obviously in profits so far - but it will come.

But more so in the shocking fact that the UK and Europe are behind the USA in terms of chosing to buy and play games on PC over console.

We(the uk) are the console sluts of the word it seems! that shocked me. But then again, what with all the burberry floating around our streets with their hats on backwards and their trousers hanging over thier arses - maybe i shouldnt be surprised?
I only do it on weekends of course

"Despite the hype around games consoles, more consumers still play games on a home PC than on a game console with the exception of gamers in the UK, France and Spain, the report said."

from the article! shocking!