The Order: 1886 and Quality vs. Value

Image courtesy of Twinfinite.net

Over the weekend, copies of Sony's upcoming major first exclusive title The Order: 1886 found their way into the hands of a few gamers, one of whom decided to upload his play through of it on YouTube. This caused a major controversy; not because someone put an entire play through of a yet-unreleased, highly anticipated game on YouTube for all to see, but because the game clocked in at about five hours. Many gamers became rather upset (actually, enraged would be the more accurate term) at the fact that a massively hyped, full-price single player-only game would offer such a short playtime. People have been debating The Order: 1886 all week long (it's still a trending topic on Twitter as I write this) and despite all of the anger it has attracted (this is the Internet, after all, and 'hate' is the only language people speak), the dispute over game length brings up some interesting discussion.

For me, game length really isn't a factor. I would much rather play a shorter game that feels concise and complete, rather than one that is lengthened with unnecessary padding (Alien: Isolation comes to mind, though I did still thoroughly enjoy that game). I cannot say whether The Order: 1886 is a 'good' or 'bad' game yet because I haven't played it; I have pre-ordered it, and, despite all of the outcry over it, am still eagerly awaiting the chance to get my hands on it.

Many people angered at the game's length immediately assume it is a bad game. That argument holds absolutely no ground. It seems to me that people are mixing up the concepts of 'quality' and 'value'. Allow me to explain:

First, remember that value is defined as "the worth or usefulness of something".

For the purposes of my explanation, let's take the entire concept of quality out of the equation and focus solely on value:

• If you buy a game for $60 and it lasts you 10-15 hours, that means you paid about $4 per gameplay hour. That is a good value. The game was a good use of your money.
• If you buy a game for $60 and it lasts you 3-6 hours, that means you paid about $10 per gameplay hour. That is a bad value. The game was a bad use of your money.

The only thing a game's length has an impact on is your wallet. Whether or not you enjoyed those six or twenty hours is completely up to you. Regardless of how long or short a game is, if you enjoyed playing it, that means you made good use of your time, and vice versa. To me, if a game is great, the fact that it's long or short is made irrelevant. A game should always be measured by how good or bad it is, not by its length. For all I know, The Order: 1886 could contain an absolutely fantastic five hours. And if that's the case, then I'll be glad I played it.

If you feel that a five hour game has no reason to be $60, you have every right to think that. But that doesn't mean the game itself is inherently bad because of it. You have to remember that quality is a perceptual, conditional, and somewhat subjective attribute that can be understood differently by many people.

In the end, the length of a game typically is the result of the developer's artistic vision. If Ready at Dawn felt that five hours was long enough to contain their vision for The Order, then you have to respect that. You don't have to like it, but just honor the fact that it's the game they wanted to make.

Gaming is an expensive hobby. Do what you wish with your money. My philosophy as I've gotten older is this: if there's something out there that you have interest in and want, go get it for yourself. Pay no attention to the opinions of others and make your own judgements. Is The Order: 1886 too short for your liking? Great, don't buy it! Are you fine with paying $60 for a five hour game? Great, buy it!

So in the end, what I'm asking is this: judge a game by its quality, not its length.

Legal Battles within the Video Game Industry

The video game industry is no stranger to legal controversy, especially when it comes to copyright infringement. The following are three of the most recent legal fights that have occurred in the gaming world.

EA Sports (Madden NFL) versus Former NFL Players

Perhaps the most widely publicized legal battle happening in the games industry is the fight between EA Sports and retired NFL players over unpaid licensing fees and the unauthorized use of their likenesses in the games. This case has been a topic of conversation for a long time, as in 2009, the NFL Players Association settled with the players for $26 million; the reason being that the players claimed the union did not seek out the best possible marketing deal for the players and worked with EA on a deal that would not give them proper compensation. However, the players still seek further payment, and the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has authorized this case to continue. In its defense, EA cited protection under the First Amendment, saying that the use of the players’ likenesses was incidental. EA ran into a similar problem with their NCAA Football games, where the company was unlawfully using college players’ likenesses without permission. EA lost that fight, and had to pay a $40 million settlement andstop producing any more games in that series.

The likelihood that EA will be able to win this lawsuit is very low. At the same time, the chance that EA would be forced to stop making games in the Madden franchise is extremely unlikely. If what the players claim is true, then EA and the NFL Players Association could be in some serious trouble, and rightly so. It is one thing to not ask permission to use a person’s likeness, but deliberately crafting a deal that would cheat someone out of fair compensation is completely wrong. This case is still ongoing, so it will be interesting to see how it pans out. But for now, EA has little ground to stand on.

Nintendo’s YouTube Affiliate Program

Over the past few years, the popularity of “Let’s Play” videos on YouTube has exploded. For the uninitiated, a “Let’s Play” video is one where a person records his or herself playing a video game while also providing live commentary. Most video game companies welcome this sort of extra exposure, but Nintendo has famously been the biggest opponent of the “Let’s Play” community. In 2013, Nintendo began claiming all revenue from video that featured any of their games, as well as shutting down some YouTube user’s channels altogether. Nintendo felt the use of their products was unauthorized, and wanted all user-generated content that featured their games taken down. As a result, Nintendo faced a major backlash from both YouTube users and long-time fans. In response, Nintendo has recently revealed plans for an affiliate plan that would allow people to produce content featuring Nintendo products, but have to split any revenue user make with the company. Nintendo has already begun tagging all videos that feature their games, making sure they receive their 50% share of the revenue.

Personally, I feel that Nintendo is stuck in the past when it comes to many current video game industry trends, especially when it comes to the “Let’s Play” community. Though I myself do not fully understand the appeal of watching someone else play a video game, I understand that it is extremely popular and incredibly profitable. Nintendo has every right to want to control the rights to their products, but the YouTube users who feature their games in their videos are doing no harm to the company or its products whatsoever. They are not “stealing” Nintendo’s content and claiming it as their own. If anything, they are giving Nintendo a little bit of extra marketing.

EA versus Zynga

In 2012, EA sued video game developer Zynga for copyright infringement, as they claimed that Zynga’s game The Ville was a direct copy of EA’s game The Sims Social. In a rather angry and emotionally charged blog post, the general manager of The Sims Social, Lucy Bradshaw, said that the lawsuit was a step towards “protect(ing) the value of originalcreative works and those that work tirelessly to create them”. Zynga is no stranger to copyright lawsuits themselves, as they have faced legal action from developer SocialApps over the similarities between their own game myFarm and Zynga’s ultra-popular game Farmville. The suit waseventually thrown out and both companies reached an out of court settlement.

To be fair, almost every single game that has been released takes at least some sort of inspiration from another. Go down any video game isle in any major store and you will see countless bargain-bin clones of other major franchise video games. EA had little footing in this suit since, in video game industry terms, developers are basically allowed to copy the basic gaming concept. Znyga did not “copy and paste” EA’s game; they took the basic idea and changed many of its concepts and gameplay mechanics. I understand EA’s reasoning, but unless they are allowed to put a patent on their own game design, they have no power in controlling if other developers create games that are similar in design to their own. 

An Empty Feeling (and It's Unexpected Cure)

Image courtesy of Accidental Creative

As busy as my life can be, I still try to find time to sit down and enjoy some good old fashioned video games every chance I get. Problem is, lately I've chosen to do something else with my free time instead of play games. For some reason I can't explain, I've feel like I haven't been enjoying games as of late. And to be frank, that notion kind of shocks and astounds me.

Gaming is my biggest hobby, one that I've enjoyed since I was a kid. So it's strange to me that all of a sudden I just want to ... stop.

Does that mean I don't like video games anymore? No, of course not. Quite the contrary, in fact. To get to the bottom of all this, I took a look back at the previous gaming year and all of the games I played, particularly those I crammed into the holiday break. That's when it hit me.

I'm burned out on video games.

Problem was, even in recognizing this, I still couldn't pry myself away from Destiny or Far Cry 4, despite me getting bored or angry with them after a few minutes. I didn't want to play video games, but at the same time, I wanted to play video games (if that makes any sense).

In an attempt to cure this craziness, I dusted off my old Super Nintendo and popped in The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past. I started up a new game save and just played. For hours. After a while I moved away from the SNES and carried on with my life. When the time came to pick up games again, I flipped open my 3DS and carried on with Shovel Knight, a game I had been (unfortunately) neglecting. Again, I couldn't put it down. Suddenly, the love for I always had for video games was renewed, and all was right with my world again.

Seems the cure for my video game blues was firmly settled in old school sensibilities. Playing the SNES reminded me of why I love games in the first place, as did the brilliant retro-stylings of the amazing Shovel Knight.

So what's the point of all this? Well, it's two fold. Firstly, even someone who loves games as much as I do can get tired of them after a while. Secondly, it's always good to revisit the past. You never know what you may find there.

Playing those 16-bit games made me realize something. The video game industry is not as fantastic as you (or it wants you to) think it is. Game design has reached new heights, but also has forgotten its roots. As good as many games are today, they could be so much better. But how do we do that? Well, that's an answer for another day (and blog post!).

Best of 2014 - Honorable Mention

There were a ton of games that could just have easily made it onto my 'Best Games of 2014' list, but for one reason or another, they didn't. Games like Far Cry 4, Shovel Knight, Threes!, and Super Smash Bros. are all fantastic games that barely missed the cut. However, there is one game in particular that I want to talk about, so consider it a 'Honorable Mention' for my favorite games of the past year.

Monument Valley

Ustwo

iOS

I've never been too big on mobile gaming. I've always felt gaming was best when experienced on a television screen with a controller in your hands. Playing games on a smartphone or tablet just felt off to me, as I always felt that the only way a video game could provide a deep and meaningful experience was on a console or PC. Then along came Monument Valley.

Monument Valley is a puzzle game based around the simple concept of guiding little Princess Ida from one point to another. But it's not that simple. Ever see a MC Escher painting? Monument Valley's ten levels are based around the twisting and warped perspectives of the classic painters works. In order to solve each puzzle you have to bend and move your surroundings to create new and unexpected paths for the little princess to traverse. In addition to it being one of the most visually and artistically stunning games I've seen on any platform, Monument Valley has some of the best "aha!" moments I've seen in any game, puzzle or otherwise, since Portal 2. It's short but so very sweet, and is designed perfectly for mobile devices (though I do recommend playing it on a tablet) and you can finish it in one sitting, or break it up into multiple play sessions.

Above all else, I think the best thing Monument Valley provided me was a new perspective on mobile gaming. It showed me that really entertaining and deep gaming experiences could occur on phones and tablets, and they weren't exclusive to consoles or PC. I found myself drawn to Monument Valley's lush world and mind-bending puzzles more than some other, bigger games that released in 2014. If you have $4 and a capable mobile device, I highly suggest giving Monument Valley a shot. It's fun, lovely to look at, and is more than worthy of attention from gamers of all kinds (even grumpy old mobile nay-sayers like me).

Negotiation and the Video Game Industry

Image courtesy of StrategicPartnerships

Deal-making is a key aspect of every business. In the video game industry, the situations and issues that require negotiation may be different than in other forms of entertainment, but the techniques used remain the same. Below are summaries of three videos that discuss various negotiation techniques as well as how the techniques they discuss apply to the world of video games.

Margaret Neale - Negotiation: Getting What You Want [Link]

Mrs. Neale, who is a professor of management at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, discusses the four steps she believes will help anyone succeed in any negotiation scenario. The steps are as follows:

1. Assess - Gain a thorough understanding of the situation. Do the benefits outweigh the costs?
2. Prepare - Research every side of the issue before starting. Understand your own interests as well as the interests of your opponent.
3. Ask - Engage with your opposition (politely, of course) and ask meaningful questions.
4. Package - Bundle up all of the issues of the negotiation as well as your desires in order to make it more appealing to your opponent.

Of those four steps, the second is perhaps the most important. One of the most important rules to follow in negotiating is to be able to separate the people from the problem. In preparing for your negotiation, you not only have to understand what the issue at hand is, but also know where your opponent is coming from and what they want out of the deal. That is key if you want to keep the discussion on the issue and not on demands.

When a developer makes a game, it is very common that they seek out a publishing partner in order to get their product to make it to market. Negotiations between developer and publisher usually revolve around money, as most negotiations do. In situations like that, the publisher needs to understand where the developer is coming from. A video game developer usually does not have enough internal funding to release the game by themselves, which is why they seek a publishing partner in the first place. The games they make are their lifeblood, and if they fail to find a way into gamer's hands, the studio will likely shut down. Publishers (like EA, UbiSoft, Activision, and Warner Bros., among others) are large corporations with lots of money and can usually withstand a few financial failures, so they have less at stake in this kind of negotiations. Luckily, today there are multiple ways to get a video game released (for better or worse) and negotiations like that do not even have to take place.

Stan Christensen - The Art of Negotiation [Link]

As an investment banker, Mr. Christensen has done his fair share of negotiating. He states that negotiation is all about effective relationship management, meaning that all good negotiators are able to maintain some sort of relationship with the person they are discussing terms with. Communication is key to develop meaningful relationships, and he stresses the fact that no negotiation can ever reach a successful end without both sides knowing who they are, what they want, and how the other thinks, acts, and feels. He also mentions the role objective criteria plays in negotiation. He stressed the importance of basing decisions on industry standards or well-known information rather than what you want or what the other party wants. To me, he is not saying to ignore your opponent's desires or demands completely, but to use outside sources to help guide your final decision to a mutually beneficial end. You cannot misinterpret demands as fact.

The wonderful thing about the video game industry is that there is a wealth of information on just about every aspect of it. Say a game studio is entering talks with a major gaming company (like Microsoft) about potentially being bought by them and made a first-party, in-house developer. A small developer being bought by a major company is something that happens all the time, and the outcomes vary greatly. Some times the developer is broken up and absorbed into other studios, and some times the developer remains intact. Depending on what the developer wants out of the negotiation, they have a lot of information to help ground the discussion in truth and help their cause.

The video game industry is all about relationships, primarily those between developers and gamers and between developers and publishers. For a developer to sell their game, either to a publisher or a gamer, they have to be able to explain why their product is important and worth playing. Gaming, in a sense, is all about trust. Gamers are a finicky crowd, and without trust and communication, no developer can stay alive for very long.

Negotiating Strategies and Tactics [Link]

The speaker in this video, Brian Tracy, talks about the various skills a person must have in order to be able to become a good negotiator. Without actually using the term, he discusses the importance of BATNAs in a negotiation (he refers to them simply as "options"). He states that a good negotiator develops many options for themselves, as that gives them more power. Preparation plays an important part in developing a BATNA since you have to think of every possible angle you can take in regards to the issue you are discussing and the solution you want. It is important to have more than one alternative to fall back on in case a negotiation falls apart.

In the video game industry, there are many options to choose from when it comes to releasing a game and playing one. As a developer, if negotiation with a potential publisher fails, the developer could use Kickstarter or IndieGoGo to raise funds. Another option would be to use the Steam Greenlight program, a platform where gamers vote for the games they want to see receive a full retail or digital release. Today, there are more ways than ever for a game to see release. So if negotiations with publishers fall apart, the fate of game developers is not entirely sealed.