EXP Podcast #537: Selling Stadia

Cheesy, but effective?

Google held another big announcement recently revealing some pricing around their games streaming platform and an assortment of games that will appear on the platform when it soft-launches this year and becomes fully available sometime in 2020. Google has lofty ambitions, but does the messaging live up to the dream?

This week on the EXP Podcast, we help sell Stadia to all the boys and girls of the world!

- Here's the show's stand-alone feed
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by clicking here, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format, or click play below.

- Runtime: 39 min 00 sec
- "Google still has no idea how to pitch Stadia" by Ben Kuchera, via Polygon
- Music by Brad Sucks

EXP Podcast #447: Epic PUBG Drama

This is  business casual, right?

Forget about the carnage taking place within the slowly shrinking blue circle; this week we're talking about a vicious battle taking place outside of Playerunknown's Battlegrounds.  Ok, maybe it's actually more of a slap fight, but even so it's still entertaining.  Epic has decided to release its own Battle Royale mode in their game Fortnite, but Blue Hole (publishers of PUBG) don't like the fact that their engine vendor seems to be directly lifting their playbook.  I think the only way to resolve this is to drop them both onto and island and let them battle for supremacy.

- Here's the show's stand-alone feed
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by clicking here, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format, or click play below.

Show Notes:

- Runtime: 35 mins 03 sec
- Music by Brad Sucks

EXP Podcast #385: Cheats and Scoundrels

Full disclosure: I stole this logo from Bossland.

Blizzard has filed a lawsuit against Bossland, a German-based software company that sells access to cheat programs for Overwatch players. The company actually offers this service for other multiplayer games as well, but does cheating in Overwatch mean something different? Why do people cheat at all? And most importantly, how are Lebron James and Big Boss involved? All this and more on today's EXP Podcast!

- Here's the show's stand-alone feed
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by left-clicking here, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format, or click play below.

Show Notes:

- Runtime: 31 mins 34 secs

- Music by Brad Sucks

EXP Podcast #294: The Minecraft Money Show

You thought buying a full priced game was expensive? Microsoft just bought Mojang, and Minecraft along with them, for 2.5 billion dollars. That is way more money than I spent to play the game. So how does Microsoft plan on making it worth their while? This week on the EXP Podcast, Scott and I are joined by a guest to discuss the future of Minecraft, what it can mean for players, and the secret life of Notch. As always, we love to hear you chime in via email or the comments below!

- Here's the show's stand-alone feed
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by left-clicking here, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format, or click play below.

Show Notes:
- Runtime: 39 mins 3 secs

- Music by Brad Sucks

EXP Podcast #288: Subscribe Now

Your bank account is slowly tricking away into nothing. Can you even remember all the services you subscribe to, right now, off the top of your head? This week on the EXP Podcast, Scott and I discuss all the ways we pay for games and services in more than one lump sum. We also touch upon potential value of EA Access coming to Xbox One. As always, we encourage you to subscribe to this very podcast below and let us know your thoughts on subscription models in the comments below.

- Subscribe to the EXP Podcast via iTunes
- Find the show on Stitcher
- Here's the show's stand-alone feed
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by left-clicking here. Or, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format.
- Subscribe to this podcast and EXP's written content with the RSS link on the right.

Show notes:

- Runtime: 35 mins 49 secs
- "PlayStation Now rentals cost $2.99 for four hours' play, but everything could be changing," by Brian Crecente via Polygon
- "EA offers top games and big discounts for $5 a month," by Justin McElroy via Polygon
- Music by Brad Sucks

EXP Podcast #242: The Magnitude of Microconsoles

"Wait! Don't touch that... welp, you touched it."

Ouya might be struggling right now, but the concept of a cheap and adaptable home console alternative to the big three is here to stay. What does that mean for the future of gaming? And what does it mean for Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo? Stick around and ask Mr. Businessman! This week on the show, Scott and I go over the edge with the coming technological tide. As always, check out the article that inspired this week's podcast in the show notes below, it's a good one. We also encourage you to leave your thoughts and predictions about microconsoles in the comments below. Do you own an Ouya? Are you a believer?

- Subscribe to the EXP Podcast via iTunes
- Find the show on Stitcher
- Here's the show's stand-alone feed
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by left-clicking here. Or, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format.
- Subscribe to this podcast and EXP's written content with the RSS link on the right.

Show notes:

- Runtime: 40 min 05 sec
- "Snuffing out disruptive microconsoles won't be so easy for the 'big three'," by Kris Graft via Gamasutra
- Music by: Brad Sucks

EXP Podcast #103: 3DSocialite

While the main draw of the Nintendo 3DS remains its titular capacity for accommodating a third visual dimension, other thought-provoking features are beginning to emerge. According to The Wall Street Journal, Nintendo is looking to implement a variety of networking and communication features aimed at turning the device into a platform for social gaming. Nintendo’s on-line strategy (such as it is) has always been unique, and it will be interesting to see if this strategy signals a bold new direction or simply another half-step towards towards keeping up with Internet-focused devices like the iPhone.

Some discussion starters:

- Is a single-use portable gaming device still appealing?

- What are your thoughts and concerns regarding the StreetPass and SpotPass programs? Does it affect your attitude towards the 3DS overall?

- Aside from obvious matchmaking functionality, what is the potential of services like StreetPass?

To listen to the podcast:

- Subscribe to the EXP Podcast via iTunes here. Additionally, here is the stand-alone feed.
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by left-clicking the title. Or, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format.
- Subscribe to this podcast and EXP's written content with the RSS link on the right.

Show notes:

- Run time: 27 min 23 sec
- “Nintendo Bets Big on Social DS System,” by Daisuke Wakabayashi, via The Wall Street Journal
- Music provided by Brad Sucks

Suspect Stewards

About a month ago, “Good Old Games,” an on-line store that sells classic video games, advertised a site relaunch by hinting that they were shutting down. This hoax was quickly sussed out by a some Internet detectives and subsequently confirmed by the company, but not before it created a miniature panic amongst customers of the service.

I've wanted to say something about this for a while, but I couldn't quite find the right angle by which to levy the harsh criticism GoG deserves. As I was writing my most recent post for PopMatters, I realized that the issue was more than an example of poor business practices. GoG's actions are offensive on a deeper cultural level and they illustrate the dangers of privatizing our past.

The entire mess started when GoG had to take the website down for a refresh. Instead of issuing an announcement explaining this, they opted for something "flashier." GOG managing director Guillaume Rambourg elaborated on this in an interview with Joystiq:

Due to this situation, we had only two options in terms of communication: either making an official "boring" statement or taking a more creative route. We have been gamers forever and thus decided to pick the second option, as we believe the industry has been getting dead serious for the last few years. If even the entertainment industry – which I believe is supposed to generate emotions and creativity – gets dull, where is the whole world going? Our aim was never to harm anybody here. All we wanted is to take an exotic path to cause a debate. Luckily, this was the first and last time we had to take down our servers. In practice, this means our future major announcements will still be creative (we'll never give up on that!), but without the slightly bitter part for our users.

It's hard to understand how Rambourg can believe that the industry is "getting dead serious." We just came off of an E3 headlined by Cirque du Soleil and showcasing motion technology intended to make games less serious undertakings in order to attract new players. Bioshock Infinite provoked more fanfare with a pre-rendered trailer than most games achieve with their release. Valve's commitment to the expanded universe around their games prompted numerous Team Fortress 2 comics and a retcon of Portal's story. The industry is as lively as it ever was, if not more.

The problem seems to be that Rambourg and other folks at GoG see themselves as Valve-like figures. They wanted to create an iconoclastic image of the company to blur the line between corporation and community member. They took a chance that the PR move would come off as quirky and lovable rather than immature and obnoxious.

They are under the illusion that GoG's role is anything more than that of a middleman. GoG is a store whose role is to provide a service rather than act as industry critic, artist, or provocateur. Valve walks a fine line that few others can even attempt, and even they are careful to limit their own quirky stunts to Valve-developed games and to treat the business end of their operation seriously.

The incident demonstrated that they were either unaware of who plays their games or ignorant as to their audience's appetite for foolishness. Does GoG or anyone else truly believe that the kind of people who are looking to play King's Quest are the kind of people amused or impressed by PR stunts? GoG is a tool for people like Michael Abbott who can use the catalogue as a resource for teaching. It's a service that allows the Vintage Game Club to appreciate and reexamine gaming history. It's a service for those who want to make sure they can hold on to history for reasons of nostalgia, education and pleasure.

At this point, perhaps we need to turn our focus towards ourselves, the gaming community. Is this the way we want to access our history? Hucksters who think that toying with their customers and a medium's artifacts don't seem like the kind of people best suited to curating gaming history. The GoG incident illustrates the problem with relying on the market to safeguard culture: marketing and profit will always carry the day.

Socially and academically-funded libraries and archives are anything but flashy, but they will be necessary if we ever want to seriously document the medium. The GoG incident has inspired me to actively pursue learning about and supporting alternative methods of preserving video game history. Relying on private companies to act as arbiters of culture is naive at best and disastrous at worst.

Are People Playing LittleBigPlanet?

This is the fifth of five posts about LittleBigPlanet. My previous posts have each focused on specific aspects of the game:

-My first post dealt with the mechanics and deconstructionist nature of the game.
-The second post addressed the game's cooperative appeal.
-The third post examined LBP's novel means of facilitating communication.
-My fourth post analyzed the philosophy of creation and cultural ownership in relation to the game.

With this post, I want to briefly engage with some of the hand-wringing concerning LBP's sales performance, and suggest that the game's future need not be as dreary as some would say. While it may be true that LBP is off to a slow start, the marketing push and the game's style suggest that LBP is a slow burn game that is continuing to grow into its potential.

I started this series on LittleBigPlanet because I felt that the game was getting lost in the cacophony that was 2008's fall gaming season. Despite high marks from almost every media outlet, it just seemed like the game was falling outside of people's attention attention. I want to examine the reasons behind this feeling, offer some thoughts on the future of LittleBigPlanet, and suggest that, when viewed in a broad context, the story of LBP is a hopeful one.

The Numbers Game

There has been some talk about LBP's sales numbers, so I feel I should briefly comment on them.

Most feel that LBP's sales numbers are less than spectacular given the game's quality and the anticipation that seemed to surround it. I did some quick research and it seems that the US numbers shake down as follows: In the U.S., there have been 5,700,000 PS3s sold, but there have only been 356,000 copies of LBP sold. To put that in perspective, let us compare LBP to another high profile console exclusive: Gears of War 2. Gears 2 is edging towards 2 million sold, which means that approximately 13% of Xbox 360 owners already have it.

While this seems daunting, half a million people is really not that bad in the context of this fall's video game deluge. The PS3 has a vastly smaller install base than both the 360 and the Wii, and competing for people's already-scarce dollars is difficult in this economy.

Games like Fable 2, FarCry 2, Gears 2, and Fallout 3 are all appealing, well-made games that also possess the luxury of having titles that end in a numeral. Franchise branding is a valuable thing, and I think we can see that the non-sequels got the short shrift this season (consider Dead Space and Mirror's Edge). The numbers for December have not been tallied yet, so I would not be surprised if the game gains some traction as word spreads and folks buy it over the holidays.

The Marketing Game

As I have exhausted my (admittedly thin) empirical evidence, I will now fall back on anecdotes to make the following point: Sony must get its act together and start promoting this game.

I see Left4Dead billboards when I go downtown. I see Fallout 3 advertisements while watching TV on ComedyCentral.com. I hear Devotchka in Gears 2 TV trailers. I only see LittleBigPlanet when I seek it out myself! This is a problem when it comes to growing a game's audience.

I have talked to multiple friends who own at least two of the current-gen systems, all of whom I consider "gamers" in the traditional sense, and they still have little-to-know idea what LBP even is. My next door neighbor, who owns both a 360 and a Wii, game me a blank look when I invited him in to play LBP. A co-worker (also a avid gamer) asked me "It's like a kid's game, right?"

As a publisher and a console manufacturer, Sony's marketing approach is baffling. Sending a new franchise into the wilderness with no publicity with which to defend itself was a grave miscalculation. Delaying a game days before release and cracking down on folks who are trying to actually use the game is insanity. Finally implementing an on-line update that adds a "search" functionality is a good step, but let us not kid ourselves: that should have been live on launch day. Furthermore, the menu and community system is still disorganized. The existence of sites like Sackbook demonstrates two things:

1. People want LBP to be about community.

2. The fact that the players had to create an external website to do it show something is missing from the game.

Here are two ideas: one simple, one complex:

1. Bundle LBP with every PS3 in every region. LBP is a game that thrives off of player involvement, and it is one of the most convincing reasons to buy a PS3, as it is an exclusive experience.

2. Why not turn the abomination that is "Home" into an extension of LBP? That way, players could interact with dozens of other Sackboys before breaking off into groups of four to explore levels. Instead of randomly jumping in with people, player could meet and plan strategies. Rather than take up valuable bandwidth with inane dancing, sexual harassment, and insulting micro-transaction based apartment decor, put the infrastructure towards something that would actually aid in the playing of games!

Playing the Game

LBP has been out for two months, but I feel that gamers are just beginning to come to terms with the game. It is a game whose appearance is familiar, but whose feel and message diverges from tradition. First, the game plays differently than what gamers are used to: its jumps are not Mario jumps. The swinging is not like Bionic commando. While I do believe the game would benefit from a bit of control-based tweaking, I think much of the criticism stems from it being different rather than outright broken. Trying to unlearn what one has learned is a difficult thing, especially for enthusiasts raised on platforming. Say what you will about the gameplay, but it is unified in its rules and deliberate in its choices. The least we can to is give it an honest try.

Second, LBP is a game whose "thesis" is radically different than most other games in any genre. LBP contains a small linear story to acclimate players to the world, but this quickly melts away when the player is allowed to take near total control. Creating a game takes time, and it is reassuring to see that every time I log on, a host of new, ingenious levels greet me. In many ways, people are only now starting to actually play the game as it was designed.


LittleBigPlanet is a game that deserves to succeed. If the world were a meritocracy, something so innovative and well-crafted would be an instant success. Unfortunately, things do not come that easy.

I wrote these posts to help spread the word about the game in hopes of preventing it from being lost in the increasingly complex world of video games. It is a game that gives us something new, something different, and it asks new things from us. The game can be difficult to grasp, both mechanically and philosophically, but it would be a shame if we backed away from these challenges. LittleBigPlanet presents us with a new world that is our for the taking. All we need to to is find the willingness to explore it.

EXP Podcast #4 - This Game is Sponsored By...

This week on the EXP Podcast, we wade in to the murky waters of advertising in video games. Microsoft-owned company, Massive Inc. held a conference in which several large publishers (such as EA, Activision, and Ubisoft) discussed how to best implement commercial advertisement in games. Let's not let them be the only ones discussing this...

As gamers (and consumers), we think it is important to engage in a conversation about advertising. Take a look at the original articles in the show notes, and feel free to weigh in on the issue.

Some possible questions for discussion:

-How aware are you of advertisements in games? Have any stood out, in either a positive or negative way?
-What kinds of games would you accept ads in, if any?
-What do you think about the financial argument in favor of placing ads in games?

To listen to the podcast:

- Subscribe to the EXP Podcast via iTunes here. Additionally, here is the stand-alone feed.
- Listen to the podcast in your browser by left-clicking the title. Or, right-click and select "save as link" to download the show in MP3 format.
- Subscribe to this podcast and EXP's written content with the RSS link on the right.

Show notes:

-Run time: 29m 26s

-The MTV Multiplayer story and the Microsoft press release

- Music provided by Brad Sucks

News for 11/12/08: Activision Blizzard Plays the Sequel Game

This week, we're discussing some recent comments made by Activision Blizzard CEO Robert Kotick. Most interesting to us were his very candid comments about the company's approach to sequels and intellectual property. Take a look at some of the articles discussing the story and then feel free to weigh in via the comments, email, Twitter, smoke signals, etc. How do you feel about the current video game industry's business model and its treatment of sequels versus new franchises?

Scott: From the Gamasutra article: "With respect to the franchises that don’t have the potential to be exploited every year across every platform, with clear sequel potential that can meet our objectives of, over time, becoming $100 million-plus franchises, that’s a strategy that has worked very well for us," Kotick said in the Gamasutra-attended call later transcribed by Seeking Alpha.

Jorge: That strategy has worked very well for them indeed.

Scott: This resulted in them dropping Ghostbusters! Good thing Atari picked it up. Even if the game doesn't end up being all that great, I love Ghostbusters. Chronicles of Riddick, not so much. I think the crazy thing here is how brazen they are about their financial strategy:
He literally used the word "exploit!"

Jorge: He knows exactly what he is doing, though maybe not what he is saying. "Exploit" has some pretty negative connotations. He could be dropping some really cool IPs too, 50 Cent notwithstanding. It makes me uncomfortable as a gamer knowing they are willing to drop innovative titles because of a market strategy.

Scott: Let's remember that Activision Blizzard has arguably the hottest IPs out there: WoW, Guitar Hero, Call of Duty. Exploiting these franchises is their meal ticket.

Jorge: They are also working on Starcraft II, which they are planning to break up into three games for each class. These are some great titles, but this is a bit weird. It feels like they are artificially elongating Starcraft, and these franchises in general, so they can milk it as much as possible. I wonder what the development process look like for these games on a ten year goal.

Scott: It looks like WoW or Guitar Hero: churning out games so people never are without the thing they like, regardless of innovation.
Of course, GH came out in 2005, and it already seems like it's been 10 years.

Jorge: In that sense they are pretty presumptuous that they can keep these titles going.
I imagine that if Activision Blizzard is keeping the same development teams on the project, the product will become stale. Surely this must stifle the creativity of the development crew if they are churning endless iterations. The result will be painfully repetitive sequels.

Scott: They'll have to do what the CoD franchise does: cycle development teams on and off the same franchise.

Jorge: But how are they going to keep people interested in this in ten years!? That is a ridiculously long time. Are you really going to want to play CoD 15? It's not going to happen unless Activision Blizzard personally funds a Third World War.

Scott: Which they could, based on their current profits.

Jorge: Also, if the industry is too focused on sequels, my fear is independent developers and new IPs will be hard to publish because developers consider them too "risky".

Scott: I think that has already happened to a large extent and that he's just articulating the current situation. We don't like hearing it, but it's basically true.
In a way though, Nintendo has been employing this technique since the company's inception: Look at all the Mario games.

Jorge: Yes, but some of those are pretty big leaps from the original franchise. Mario Kart has very little to do with Mario Sunshine. They are the same franchise, but Nintendo was willing to take dangerous creative leaps.

Scott: True, Nintendo has a track record of innovation.

Jorge: I think Activision Blizzard is too optimistic about this. I think people are going to be sick of these titles long before the ten year mark.

Scott: But either by luck or by skill, they seem to be in a unique situation to do try this business model. People love these games and they don't seem to be slowing.

Jorge: If they come out with these so often, a guitar hero title every year with another CoD in development before the first one of the year even drops

Scott: But there must be people out there who will just by the game based on the title, almost out of habit. This is what Kotick is cashing in on: people who like the games enough to buy them, even if they won't play them that much, rather than targeting a smaller number of people who will buy them, love them, and play the hell out of them.

Jorge: Of course, from a business aspect it makes a lot of sense. Shareholders must be loving this. But from a gamer perspective, I am worried about the repercussions of this business model.

Scott: I have been thinking a lot about World of Goo and its place in this business model.
Maybe if companies are focusing on one franchise, it allows games like this to exist? Or perhaps WoW is secretly funding some black-ops Activision Blizzard new IP project that we don't know about?

Jorge: God I hope so.

Scott: Maybe if the big companies were using a shotgun style scattering of new IPs, it would dilute the impact of unique games like World of Goo.

Jorge: That could be how the process works. It's a circle of life and death. A small developer works on a new IP, the good ones float to the top to be milked to death.
We'll have to see in ten years whether Bobby Kotick is fired or if we're just loving Cello Hero: Symphony Edition!

Scott: Either way, I'm sure he's a rich, rich man. Little Bobby Jr. is flying to college on the wings of Guitar Hero.

Jorge: I hope Blizzard is using some of their money on genetic engineering. That way he could fly on a real mountable griffin.

News for 10/8/2008: New & Used Gears of War 2

This week in news we are talking about Epic Studio's plan to release downloadable content for Gears of War 2 for those who buy the game new and on launch date. This seems like a pretty obvious attempt to address lost profit concerns with used games. If this game is purchased used, the consumer will never be able to get their hands on the map pack. We've condensed our discussion, which included sandwich analogies and meat-scented-candles, to the following post. The used games issue has gotten a lot of interested lately. If you've got a strong opinion either way, let us hear it.


Scott: Now, buying Gears 2 used, do we feel cheated?

Jorge: I don't. If I decide to buy it used for a cheaper price I'm essentially getting what I paid for. If anything its more fair.

Scott: But, my point is that once the code for exclusive new content is used, the game is changed. Someone who buys it used is buying a different product. Jorge: That is exactly what the publishers want. If you buy a used version of GoW2, then you are not buying the same product but you are getting a cheaper deal for it. This addition to the game forces the consumer to make a decision that can only give the publishers a more fair portion of the profit. What would you ask for in exchange, I cheaper copy of an already cheap used game? Look at DLC for example. You have two things already on the market. Some people buy it. For those who don't, it is a different game.

Scott: It feels like that with DLC, everyone is starting with the same basic game, and then they can modify it as they see fit. The Gears2 example makes it so that people who buy the same disc won't have the same game nor the option to buy it.

Jorge: They do have the option though. Your option is buy the game when it first hits the shelves. Either you buy the Gears2 and give the developers a more fair share of the profits or you buy the used version and suffer the consequences.

Scott: This calls into question people's rights to sell games. If you buy a game that is only truly "complete" if it is new, the product is instantly devalued for the next person who wants to sell it.Should you have the right to sell the same product you bought, with the only difference is that it is used?

Jorge: Right. That is a tough question, and to be honest I don't know where I side on this. But that is why Epic's action is so ingenious.
Scott: So you think that they're ingenious for confusing us? You think that the glass is half full?
Jorge: If we change how we perceive this new content then GoW2 is satisfying both aspects of the issue here. If we see the new weapons attached to new copies of GoW2 as extra and the lack thereof as the "actual" game, then there isn't a problem. You can still sell your game or buy one used. You just won't be getting that bonus material. Essentially they are just rewarding those gamers who will buy their game early.

Scott: they're only rewarding them if the other gamers have the option to buy the content they initially had to wait for.

Jorge: Do you think it would be more satisfying if they released the content later as DLC?

Scott: I feel like everybody should have the opportunity to play the game in its entirety.
Jorge: What if you saw the extra content as something consumable that you can keep or give away. You could, theoretically, buy GoW2, not use the code, and then sell the game and code together. Or, if you enjoy the map pack, you could use the code, thereby keeping it on your hardware. You could sell the game, just not that portion.

Scott: Essentially, we are moving towards a model where the consumer owns specific components of the game (components they are free to sell individually) instead of the game as a whole.

Jorge: Right. But in this case the loss of value is coming from the user not the publisher.

Scott: And we're both in agreement that we respect the publisher's wishes to make some money off their games.

Jorge: Yes, and Gamestop is a major factor in curbing the profits that flow to the publishers.with their almost fanatical attempts at getting people to buy used games and sell their own for a couple bucks.

Scott: I can't really blame the publishers for trying to circumvent Gamestop since they don't see any money from the used stuff.

Jorge: Yea, but Gamestop itself is at the core of the issue right now. We'll open up that can of worms another day.