Nintendo: we do things OUR way

I am so glad Chris Kohler addressed the feelings I had with all this talk of "Nintendo should go software-only, or at the very least invest in mobile games. This was sparked, by those who didn't hear about it, by this Pokémon title coming to Apple's App Store.

First and foremost, a quick disclaimer: like the article mentioned, The Pokémon Company is not Nintendo, but an affiliate company created to manage the franchise's many tendrils like comics, TV shows, movies, merchandising etc. So this isn't even like Nintendo itself developed the software.

So, let's set the record straight: this is not a sign of anything, it is not a trend and it is most certainly not related to the current 3DS woes. I share Kohler's point of view: Nintendo's strength has always been its uniqueness. In fact, their recent success with the Wii and DS lies almost entirely on their courage to be different: the Blue Ocean Strategy to grow a stagnant market. OK, you can all lower your hands: yes, the mobile market also exploded, but while it may or may not be a bubble, the fact is that it is a ruthless and complex ecosystem. It's no wonder Apple itself is not producing games: while its very lucrative to run the App Store and nickel-and-dime content providers, making money as a developer has proved tricky and extremely unpredictable.

Now, by trying to shoehorn Nintendo software into the App Store, a bunch of problems start cropping up: they wouldn't get NEARLY as much attention as they do on their own platforms... but that's just the beginning. As Kohler pointed out, Nintendo fine tunes their hardware meticulously for their software - Apple forces draconian limitations on all content providers on a whim. And while Nintendo's production system run on very low costs, they iterate prototypes like crazy - I would assume between the time they start tinkering with a concept until they deliver a finished product, Apple will have gone through 3 major iOS updates and 2 iPhone revisions at least (true, that may also apply to their own hardware, but at the very least can plan much better by looking further ahead on their own hardware roadmap).

Can you even imagine Nintendo trying to bow down to the style of simplistic software that people consume on the App Store? While I think they are very capable developers, to me it feels like asking Beethoven to compose heavy metal or Leonardo da Vinci to draw an impressionist fresco - I am not making any judgements of value here, but the fact is that they developed their methods towards other styles.

So, at the end of the day, what does developing for the App Store (or any other mobile-focused marketplace, for that matter) entail for Nintendo?

• Way more competition and less ways of standing out
• Absolutely no control over hardware; external software limitations
• Fickle audience with a narrow focus on limited experiences (quick and cheap is better)
• Giving up on emerging opportunities of innovation

While I think Kohler's example of Sega is not directly analogous, it still illustrates the pitfalls extremely well. In this case, Apple found a great opportunity and seized it - but I am not entirely sure they are all that motivated to keep gaming as a priority in the long run: they are known to create planned obsolescence and drop products that are deemed unworthy at a moment's notice - I could list several, but Front Row is an example that is still fresh in the memories of those who just updated to Mac OSX Lion. Nintendo, on the other hand, does the exact opposite: they are extremely concerned about the future of videogames. They have constantly struggled to ensure that the industry did not paint itself into a corner or created unsustainable circumstances. Heck, they single-handedly friggin' undid the North American Videogame Crash of the 80's!

Sure, a lot has changed, and Nintendo is by no means a saint: they did a fair share of strong-arming software developers in the Famicom days, but they still see videogames as not only their future, but as a form of craft that needs to be preserved and cared for. And so far they seem to have done a good enough job to be trusted with this amazing medium.

The pricing lessons

So now Nintendo president Satoru Iwata says that the 3DS price drop stems from a lesson learned from the GameCube. Huh... I find that slightly ironic, actually. Not because I think it's a bad decision - on the contrary: I find Nintendo's flexibility in finally offering hardware at a loss as a strategic decision very important. That's not the reason.

Unfortunately, I can't find the original quote, but Iwata had a very interesting take on price reductions: he complained about the competitors pricing strategy of inflating on launch and discounting so soon - it basically educated most consumers into waiting. He did actually repeat this now, but I find it interesting that Nintendo had historically been aware of setting prices that were sustainable on the long run: have a look at any Mario, Zelda, Metroid etc title and how they hold their original prices for months, sometimes years. Heck, the Wii discount line was introduced not so long ago, as the console is going into its twilight years.

Ordinarily, I would not mention this now. However, there ARE two other topics Iwata brought up that are very much related: Maintaining the perception of value in games (which also relates to his opinion on the Apple Cheap Apps by the Dozen model) and the fact that they are still planning on an expensive Wii U.

“The value of videogame software does not matter to them,” Iwata said, referring to phone manufacturers.

Why do I say that? Because at the end of the day all that may sound like a conflicting opinion, but it's not: we as an industry cannot afford to let the perception of the value of gaming be diminished. Yes, it's nice to have a casual market that consumes on impulse, but this model will cause a continuous erosion to the point where games cannot get any simpler - this is not wrong in and of itself, but needs to be seen as an alternative path. One must continue to invest in the quality of their products so that the industry can grow and pursue new horizons.

Now many may now raise their hands and say that the launch of the original Wii against the PS3 and Xbox 360 would go against that. I disagree. It helped harvest a new public for games while keeping production costs under control during the *ahem* Revolution. It is now time to reap that benefit while still maintaining a responsible control of the hardware to keep the train going. The reason for the capital letters is simply to avoid another Cold War-style arms race for better graphics that could inflate prices again. As it is, we have to struggle with an avalanche of DLC and in-box anti-resale tactics from publishers.

Again, there are too many unknown variables in the Wii U at this point to make any sort of prediction, but I do trust Iwata's feelings on the industry and how to propel it forward. Yes, I do think the 3DS pricing was a mistake, but one based more on tradition than careful planning, and one that maybe was corrected in time. We'll just have to wait and see.

And for the record... they must be doing something right: New Super Mario Bros DS, a five year old game for an outdated platform, made it to the top ten most sold games in the US in July 2011. Just saying...

Sun Tzu would be proud

Nintendo is quite famous for its oriental-style wisdom. Be it in the meaning of its name or famous quotes like the “upturning of the tea table”, there is a zen beauty in the simplicity of their argument. And that’s why this whole Cafe thing going on right now made my brain buzz with the ingenuity – be it accidental or purposeful – of its strategy.

“What are you talking about?”, you might be asking. Well, I am obviously connecting loose pieces of a puzzle that are dripping sparsely in rumors (and when it comes to Nintendo, not everything can be taken at face value – remember the Tegra chipset and worldwide 3G deals for 3DS that never came to pass? Nintendo engineers research a lot of stuff that never amounts to actual products). Yet, if what we know is true, Nintendo could very well be preparing the simplest and most elegant move in an elaborate game of chess. But first, a little disclaimer: given their philosophy, I think a lot of this may indeed be accidental, because they usually don’t base their decisions on the competition THAT much… but who knows? I think the effect will be the same nonetheless.

Now let’s see what we know: SUPPOSEDLY the new system, codenamed “Cafe”, is based on IBM PowerPC technology and ATI graphics chipset, not unlike the Wii. However, the architecture seems much more in line with the Xbox 360, and given the timeframe, it will probably be slightly more powerful than the Microsoft offering, sporting the R700 chipset. There are talks of naming the system “Stream”, which could be connected to a supposed touch-screen enabled controller capable of running gameplay on itself. Let’s keep all that in mind and work from there, shall we?

I think it’s safe to say that one of Microsoft’s biggest advantages this generation was coming out first. Being the first off the gate has helped tremendously with a few exceptions (the Dreamcast and the Genesis/Mega Drive come to mind). By releasing their system now, Nintendo has pretty much check-mated both Sony and Microsoft: they officially have to hurry their next generation, which clearly wasn’t in their short term plans. Microsoft has just cracked a new target segment with the Kinect and it would be unwise to leave them orphaned by introducing a new system and moving support away. But since their obvious upgrade for a new generation would be significantly better graphics, chances are they would have to wait at least a couple of years to offer something truly eye-catching at consumer-affordable prices (Sony made it plenty clear that US$599 was not an acceptable price tag for a videogame with the PS3). This gives Nintendo a lot of time to sail peacefully.

But that’s not all. By doing this, Nintendo now will have a platform that is easily portable for Xbox 360 and PS3 games. If I were them, I’d even go as far as suggest software companies to keep the exact same assets (not using the possible extra horsepower), and just raise the resolution to 1080p and/or lock the frame rate at 60fps (the latter incidentally also makes games more easily adaptable for stereoscopic 3D display, should they decide to pursue that feature). Games will look pretty much the same, but will FEEL much nicer. And that just adds more pressure on Sony and Microsoft to deliver a new generation that not only looks good, but will also be expected to run at 1080p and 60fps – a very tough juggling act. I am sure they will have 1080p, but the 60fps is always something developers are willing to sacrifice to make their titles shinier. At the same time, it’s something consumers don’t DEMAND… and yet, if you get them used to it, it can be very hard to give up – just see all the PC users complaining when they play on a console.

If that comes to be the case, Nintendo’s biggest hurdle will be convincing those that already have a PS3 or Xbox that the migration is worth it, as a good part of the software lineup will probably be similar. For die-hard Nintendo fans that won’t be a question: new Marios, Zeldas and Metroids should be more than enough (and I am willing to bet a new Pikmin would be the ideal game to showcase the console when it is unveiled and launched: just imagine a beautiful realistic garden with thousands of tiny colorful creatures). But that still leaves a lot of people. I bet the new system will have a new controller, but will also be backwards compatible with GameCube and Wii controllers as well as games. I am still not sure what they will offer here to create the same splash the 3DS and Wii created, and am guessing the full skinny on the controller will probably help answer that. However, I think there is one more part of the equation.

The 3DS gives us an interesting insight. It already has the first inklings of Nintendo’s new instance with online connectivity and community. Streetpass and Spotpass are clearly features that are vital to their strategy – they want people as well as games to communicate amongst themselves. It’s an evolution of the whole WiiConnect24, which sincerely never was implemented properly. Now imagine if the controller was Streetpass compatible. Some cool concepts start coming up, like a much friendlier implementation of social gaming that does not depend on Facebook spamming. Not only that, but what if instead of Achievements they implemented a system of Play Coins in which you gain them by completing certain tasks and you could unlock certain game content with it? What if this content could even be traded among contacts? The possibilities are enticing.

I am guessing that the "Stream" name may hide more than we imagine. What is being streamed where? Games to the console or the controller? Save data among friends? I expect the big surprise to be somewhere in there. Like I said, I think the community features may be the key, but we might just have to wait and see.

But if there is one thing I learned with Nintendo is to not get overly excited with possibilities. I loved the concept of WiiConnect24. I dreamed of visiting towns of offline friends in Animal Crossing… and that only led to disappointment. Yet Nintendo has all the right cards in their hand at the right time (pun intended). Maybe it was not their plan… but I guess it really does pay to leave destiny to the heavens.

Storytelling in games - should it be different?

My recent discussions about how videogames should handle narratives has been very fruitful lately, with a few interesting discoveries lately. One little exercise we proposed in the discussion group was to try and imagine something that could only be done in interactive media - and I brought an example that many people thought provoking.

The concept was actually a bit backwards: how to adapt the 3D animated movie "9" into a game. When I first watched it, frankly, the story was weird. In what seemed to be a response to bad focus group results, the ending looks like was changed for something happier - because it goes against what the plot was trying to establish all along: that a sacrifice was necessary to "fix" what had been causing the problem all along.

Now, I am sure you can read a plot synopsis of the movie just about anywhere, but I will try to address most of the points here. The movie starts very much like one of my favorite games, The Neverhood. The main character comes to life with no knowledge of who he is or what is going on - and will learn, in time, that his creation is connected to the plight the world is currently in.

There certainly were enough action elements in the movie to make it an easy candidate for the game treatment, but it is in the story that I think we find the really interesting aspect of this adaptation: at one point, we learn that the big monster was actually meant as a useful tool made by humans that got out of control because it lacked a soul. And the numbered doll characters we are introduced to as the protagonists are actually different pieces of the soul of its creator, that were meant to be imbued in his creation all along. Now, by the time this discovery takes place, the monster has already consumed part of these characters.

Now, with this knowledge, you’d think that the remaining characters would just sacrifice themselves (they even catch glimpses of their fallen comrades inside the creature). But no, they fight and defeat the monster, and see the others “freed” from it. Yeah, it makes for a happy Hollywood ending, but what if that sacrifice was on the hands of the player? What if he had to go against everything he’d been doing so far?

We have seem some similar cases in gaming like this, but I don’t think they have ever been done properly. We all know RPG battles that cannot be won, but the plot just progresses after you lose. A better example was wearing the glasses and defeating the ghost possessing the character in Symphony of the Night (something we also saw in Aria of Sorrow by solving a puzzle and equipping three very specific souls). But then again, in neither case the decision was properly tied with the plot for the player to feel engaged in doing so.

I deeply believe that, like movies took some time to truly stand apart from theater (go watch Méliès A "Trip to the Moon" to understand what I mean.)


For a good while, even while they already had special effects, movies lacked modern camera angles and editing. I think videogames are still using movies as crutches - especially when it comes to storytelling. And I think it's a few small ideas that will make the most difference.

For one thing, I believe the biggest, most important lesson we have to learn, is that the best narrative tool for interactive media is actually changing rules. If we try to decompose games into their smallest particle, we will see that they are a set of rules. Now, by bending these rules we really get an effect that could not be achieved in other media. See the ending of Super Metroid as an example:



It starts as a quite normal fight. Samus actually goes on a trip down memory lane and defeats Mother Brain pretty much exactly like she did in the first game. But then the foe actually get a body, and the skirmish marches on. After a certain point, Mother Brain starts charging an unavoidable beam that completely ravages our heroine. Note that the game never takes away control, and you can suffer from it for quite a while depending on your skill. You eventually get down to your last drop of energy and you can't move Samus while the monster slowly kills you... and starts charging the big beam again - only to be interrupted by the baby Metroid (now all grown up) you save in the end of the previous game. All bets are off: you get your energy replenished and an incredible new weapon - all while Mother Brain slowly kills the Metroid. We had both storytelling and a bending of rules that completely immerses the player, delivering gameplay and emotional response at the same time. Other good examples of this include the ending of Earthbound (Mother 2) and Metal Gear Solid 2.

We need to encourage more experimentation, something that Hollywood actually had the time to do before budgets skyrocketed and enforcing formulas to ensure profits became the law. Unfortunately, games jumped from niche to mainstream too fast - but the wonders of digital distribution have opened doors for the indie market to flourish and make a stand. You don't have too look any further than Daniel Benmergui's unorthodox-yet-amazing interactive poem "Today I Die". But it's hard being noticed and making an impression when you are going against budgets that rival even the production of the games themselves.

In an age where "emergent gameplay" is a common buzzword and presentation takes front seat to actual narrative, I fear that the next level of storytelling may already be being buried before it was barely given a spin.

Building blocks

Having recently come up with a game concept for a few developers to take a stab at a budget, I was again reminded of a few quirks of this industry. The first one being that the mere mention of "game concept" by a company with focus in marketing/advertising is enough to chill a designer's blood. I can't blame them - I am sure they get called with "concepts" such as "can you map the entire country in 3D with individual buildings, each containing a different activity?" and the like. It certainly was reassuring to see them calm down as they realized we had a grasp of what we were doing.

But as I work on the high-level concept, I realized once again the Pokémon may be the closest to a "perfect game" we'll ever achieve. If you look at the universe of statistics in Pokémon (and yes, there are A LOT of hidden ones, I know - but what matter here are the ones the player is aware of, even if not printed on-screen, such as creature rarity), the number isn't as high as in many RPGs. Yet the rules are clear, and for the most part, simple. It's amazing how intuitive they are - even little kids have some grasp of the outcome of a situation without beginning to grasp the complex mathematics the game keeps under the hood.

So a lot of the game design concept work was coming up with ideas to KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) and yet engrossing, somehow. One big hurdle was balancing how much we should invest in a "Level Up" system to keep people coming back, or mini-game variety to keep things fresh and accessible. How much can you rely on a good license? And when dealing with a younger audience, how much parental control do you need to balance with user interaction? I swear I never thought I'd have so much respect for Nintendo's Friend Code policy...

There is a very fine line to ensure the experience for the player is "fun", which usually is a factor of challenge and reward. Not enough challenge makes it boring, too much makes it frustrating. Having it just right can be a reward in itself, but you need to make sure there is "something more" to keep 'em coming - and in that what Microsoft did with Gamerscore as a social phenomenon is impressive. Having the idea may not be the easiest part - but making all these cogs connect and work is the real challenge.

Here's hoping that we can get this little baby off the ground!

The future of narrative, one choice at a time

It's not news that I believe storytelling has the potential to evolve through videogames - with games such as Mother 2 and Metal Gear Solid 2 rewriting rules as to how fiction can work in the 21st century - but recently I have been thinking a lot about Interactive Novel as a viable alternative to non-gaming electronic entertainment product... which came about with Katawa Shoujo.

Developed by an independent group comprised of 4chan users, this game is a Visual Novel according to Japanese standards - but most will think of it simply as a Dating Sim. Not that this definition is wrong, but in a surprising turn of events, the writing here is surprisingly good. When you take into consideration the plot revolves around a protagonist with heart disease moving into a school for kids with disabilities (with potential romance with a deaf girl, a blind girl, an armless thalidomide girl, a double leg amputee girl and a girl with a scarred face), one quickly assumes that the game will quickly descend into serious fetishism... but that is not the case. The tale is woven with a surprising sensibility, which even spurred some interesting discussions.

The Visual Novel is apparently responsible for 70% of all PC games in Japan, and also are present on most consoles and handhelds over there. The genre is incredibly under-represented abroad, though, with only more complex titles such as Ace Attorney and the rare one-shot such as Time Hollow making it across the Pacific. While I have no hard data, I assume the vast majority of the titles in Japan are the very basic "lots of text, pick a choice, rinse, repeat" with static images and dating themes. Now, I do not have any problems with the first aspect, but Katawa Shoujo made me realize the enormous potential of this model - with or without romantic themes (pornographic or otherwise).

First and foremost, this plain "read a lot and pick an option" is roughly the equivalent of the current casual craze. Just about any potential customer can read and pick options - and we know the fiction publishing market is real - I mean, how much money was made by Harry Potter and Twilight lately? And I think it's pretty clear that both these cases resulted in tons of merchandising because people want to be part of these universes. Visual Novels and Interactive Fiction seem like a very reasonable way to tap into this demand. Which is not to say that there isn't a few hurdles here: reading on a computer screen is not always the most pleasant of experiences, as most heavy readers will tell you. But with devices such as the Kindle and the iPhone/iPod Touch becoming mainstream, this could quickly become less of a problem.

In fact, this Interactive Fiction model has even more going for it. Not only does it adhere to the Casual Craze and New Portable Devices Fad, but it also fits into the Episodic/App Store model with incredible grace. I believe the biggest challenge here is to kickstart the habit - find a way to "teach" people the value of such a product. The best way, obviously, would be to tap licenses such as the ones mentioned above: Twilight or Harry Potter, and why not works by authors such as Tom Clancy or Dan Brown, or even shows like Lost?

And the best thing is that this genre is truly at its infancy. This is a medium with incredible potential. At first you'd probably stick to the basics - but why not fly higher? You could work elements that are influenced by how many people picked a certain response, or weave trends in future episodes... and those are just some quick ideas. In this world full of ARGs, these interactive pieces could be yet another part of the larger puzzle.

And yet... the genre is all but dead outside of Japan. After the slow, painful death of Adventure games (such as Monkey Island and King's Quest), it seems like any hope Visual Novels had in the West was lost. But I want to believe this will change. Maybe after people get over those "object hunt" casual games I despise with a passion, someone will remember that a good story that casts YOU as the main character is a Holy Grail waiting to be found. And you know what the best part is? There is a bunch of free tools to make them available on the net.

But you know what? Don't take my word for it. Download the Katawa Shoujo demo, try it for yourself (I recommend playing it through a couple times and trying to get at least 2 different endings) and tell me you would not pay for a good written Visual Novel as you would for a good book.

P.S.: Yes, I miss my GameBooks.

How videogaming graduated from geekiness into mainstream

I may have serious issues about the way Sony handles their gaming and its marketing operation, but I think I can say all gamers owe them one thing: being thankful for the respect they brought us.

Some of you may not entirely realize if you didn't live the pre-PlayStation years, but videogaming was once synonymous with a nerd and socially inept. Sure, part of the stigma remains, but not NEARLY as bad as before then. I think all old-school gamers sighed with relief when watching "The 40 Year Old Virgin" bit with the two characters throwing insults at each other... possibly the first realistic mainstream representation of two people playing games. Try as you might, in commercials, movies or any other media, people playing videogames were always kids with glassy eyes, mouths open in dark rooms. No exceptions.

But how did this transformation come to be? Believe it or not, in great part due to Sony's marketing strategies in launching the very first PlayStation. One could argue that Sega dabbled into that a bit trying to antagonize Nintendo, but it was the usual "2nd place exploitation" than actual strategy. Their whole viral ENoS launch (RED E-> Ready Ninth of September, date of the launch of the console) with the "U R not E" was somewhat of a gamble in my opinion, but it brought great changes for gamers.

And I must admit credit is due: their timing was impeccable. Around that time was then the first generation of young gamers were turning into young adults, and therefore the market was ripe for someone promising "more mature" entertainment. It's worth noting that European game advertising has usually been a couple of steps ahead of its American counterparts, including some fabulous PlayStation campaigns directed by people like David Lynch and one of my favorite (albeit banner) commercials: this magnificent Xbox 360 piece.

The interesting result of that approach was that people who didn't grow up with gaming - the ones who were not labeled "nerds" actually dipped their toes into gaming, and *gasp* some COOL people were trying Madden Football and some select titles. Heck, the original US spot for Final Fantasy VII barely clued you into the fact this was a text-heavy RPG (which, other than making it one of the best-selling PSOne titles, also gives it the dubious honor of one of the most returned videogames in the US this side of Atari's E.T. and Pac-Man.

It's important to notice that this is very different from what the Wii did. The PlayStation was still sold as a videogame, and it was a stepping stone to the current college dorms full of Xboxes and Madden and Halos of today. The Wii, on the other hand, disguised itself as something that was not even to be thought was a videogame - but I also think that it had to use these previous stepping stones to get there.

We've certainly come a long way.

Indies to Indies

I find it kind of funny the current "indie game revival" we are going through right now. Of course, with games going for US$59.99 I don't think that's exactly a surprise, but the retro fad is also helping a lot - as the people who started playing games in the 80s are now in their mid-20s and early 30s, it's no surprise that pixels are the new polygons.

Trust me, I am not complaining. With titles like Fez and La Mulana popping up on consoles' download services, I couldn't be happier. But it's clearly a case of "one man's trash is another man's treasure" - I see that a lot of people who started gaming with a PlayStation can't quite grasp the appeal of these titles. But fact is that, with ballooning production costs, indie seems the way to go, even for some weathered professionals. You have to look no further than the LucasArts veterans over at TellTale. Heck, they are even doing a new Monkey Island series!

But what really strikes me as interesting is the fact that this is exactly as games started. Ken and Roberta Williams programming games with photocopied manuals, put into ziploc bags (such as "Mystery House", pictured left) and sold on local software stores are just one example. Richard Garriott did Ultima by himself, and a lot of other garage programmers had their breaks this way. I fondly remember the shareware days, with companies like Apogee putting game demos of Commander Keen and Wolfenstein 3D on BBSs for people to purchase full versions by mail (the physical kind).

And so it comes full circle that, on this age of PayPals, broadband Internet connections and social networks that people can go back to this kind of videogame production. Since commercial games now cost way too much for any John or Jane to make it without millions of funding (and therefore being strictly guided by giant publishers with little interest in anything not absolutely mainstream), this new ecosystem flourished in wonderful ways. Not only you get freeware tools like AGS, but amazing titles like Cave Story, as well as open source remakes such as FreeCiv. And that's not even going into commercial indie game like Braid. We are talking about a pretty incredible spectrum here.

But if those games were the norm during the primordial ooze of gaming, nowadays they are still somewhat of an underground phenomena, still failing to achieve the mainstream. Sure, WiiWares and Live Arcades are helping, but there is still a long way to go. I don't expect them to sell better than the Halos or Marios - but at least to receive the attention similar to that of indie movies like Clerks. Is that asking too much?

Blog, take 3!

Well, well... today my wife's assistant came and asked me why I hadn't been posting on the blog. And the truth is that I should have. Despite the big project coming up that I really can't talk much about, I've been having enough free time that I should take the opportunity to post more.

I mean, it's not like I haven't been commenting on the various usual subjects - movies, games, comics... I just hadn't been doing it publicly. And now, with me writing for Playboy and Mundo Estranho, I see no reason not to.

So, with stuff from the new E3 format, the Zeebo, Sony finally coming to Brazil, our new project and its many ramifications... wow... I really should be posting. And I expect to change this very soon. Watch this space.

Embracing the community

Working with a community website can be a gigantic task. There are months and months of planning, when each feature is carefully discussed and made to fit into a huge puzzle of user contributions in order to maximize the time spent there. But the results can always surprise you. One has just to visit a Cybercafé in Brazil and see people using Orkut scraps like a primitive (and not particularly private) instant messaging system to fully grasp how this works.

Trying to get your idea back on rails will take a lot of work. Google tried integrating GTalk into Orkut as a way to push their own IM system and solve this issue, but as far as I can tell, the results weren't exactly perfect either (even if the move is quite clever). We ran into a similar situation at GameTV: we forgot to block CSS editing in our blogs, and soon everyone was using this trick to customize their looks. Unfortunately, the less experienced users were also supressing their own Edit button and getting stuck out of their blogs, resulting in dozens of emails complaining about it.

A producer must be one with its audience, not unlike Sam Walton made a point of checking his WalMart stores personally. There is much to be learned from your users, but to study them without influencing the results (like in a Focus Group testing) can be a herculean task - if you want an example, you have to look no further than Microsoft and their UI and original Xbox controller to show just how little users can communicate what they truly want.

So the real trick here is harnessing these needs and wants and focusing them into a product that keeps them coming back for more. I am going through a very complicated stage right now, trying to guess from other sites... but the real work will really begin once the site is live. And then, we'll see.

New projects and it all comes together

Well, as my game design consultation winds down (though I am still giving overall project consultation), I have landed a new job at another Internet start-up that I believe has a lot of potential. I know "Internet Start-up" is practically a swear word these days, but I sincerely haven't been this excited with a project in years. Also, it helps to be earning some actual cash to pay the bills.

One of the best parts of this new project - other than the fact I hope I will be able to pimp it in more precise terms because it won't be secret for so long now - is that fact that it seems like a curious culmination of almost everything I have been doing for these last 8 years. I know, hard to envision without actual facts... but I hope those will be forthcoming. And thus, I will be able to post more frequently.

I love this electronic entertainment industry, something I have been doing through all of its ups and downs. It helps cement my passion for it, and it will be good to finally feel like I was able to give something back.

Watch this space.

Congratulations, Mr Hirai

Kaz Hirai, the new head honcho at Sony's gaming division, has given one of the most amusing interviews ever. In it, he had such great quotes as:

"It's difficult to talk about Nintendo because we don't look at their console as being competitors. They're a different world and we operate in our world -- that's kind of the way I look at things."

"[Xbox 360] lacks longevity ... Last time I checked, they've never had a console that's been on the market for more than four or five years and we've committed to a ten year life cycle, so you do the math."

"Unless things go really bad, there's no way that at the end of a life cycle our competition is going to have a higher install base."

"We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that [developers] want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?"

"I'd like to think that we continue official leadership in this industry."

And I thought after Kutaragi was fire... I mean, after his *retirement*, we wouldn't have any cooler soundbites anymore...

Teamwork!!! Let's go!

Working with game design inside a bigger team is usually a big challenge - and something I have been experiencing once again now with my new project. I had the uncomfortable position of coming in with a design already in place, and basically having to scrap it and start over. The hardest part is not doing it from scratch, or even fitting it to the briefed spec... but dealing with the previous designer, who I will need to work with for the rest of the project. Don't get me wrong, she is GREAT, and I don't think I could ever pull it off without her aid... but retooling someone's baby and getting the chemistry between everyone going can be tricky.

But there is a great upside. This is a small, independent project. And so, we can steer clear from the huge corporate pressure that a project would have in a bigger company. Why is this so meaningful? Well, I believe the current business practices tend to leave every single member of the team working separately on a self-contained aspect of the game... which is great if you are looking to be the most cost-effective possible, but forces a lot of people to work in a very abstract manner.

I like comparing videogames to Hollywood, in that the interactive media "grew up" too fast - or rather, almost not at all before it became widely commercial. And in doing so, didn't mature as media before it had to worry too much about being part of a well-oiled industry. Working on small independent projects allows one to have a much more concrete view of the project, and have every single member pitch in on almost every issue. And I am a strong believer that even a musician should give his opinion about gameplay, and a texture artist should have a say on the physics engine, and the programmer is great for finding solutions in just about every area (aren't they always?).

If anyone has a chance, I strongly reccomend watching the bonus disc that comes in the Special Edition of Metal Gear Solid 4, where you see Hideo Kojima's role in the production. He basically opinates in a very concrete manner in just about every area of the game. Sure, you gotta be Mr. Metal Gear himself and own your own production studio to be able to wiggle your way around the huge corporate overhead, but it still should be a lesson for anyone who wishes videogames to be treated as art someday.

And that is why I love my current project :) Our last meeting was great, with just about everyone vetting the design document I came up with. And the fact I had a say in the art direction and overall music direction gives me hope that this could be big. It will take time, certainly. But I believe I am doing the right thing.

Torneko, we salute you

The past few days I have been pretty entertained playing Dragon Quest IV, a DS remake of a game that dates back to 1990, one of the last few great games released on the NES/Famicom. Not only was I impressed replaying the remake of the first one on the Game Boy, but the feeling of awe came back all over again. It's not impressive on a technical level, but almost solely on its simple yet effective design.

Recent RPGs have tried to ease the boredom of grinding (spending hours leveling up) with ellaborate schemes to further make each character individually different - Sphere Grids, License Boards, Mantra Experience... I could spend days thinking of different formulas proposed by different games, but DQ gets away with it by simply making you noticeably more powerful with every level - and each character gain abilities and stats in his or her specific way. You don't worry about who to teach Wind spells - they will learn it on their own when the time comes. But what really surprised me was a chapter just waiting there in the introductory part of the game - Torneko's story. Spoilers ahead, for those who care about this.

Torneko is about the antithesis of the RPG hero: he is a middle-aged fat merchant (married with a kid, even!) with the sole aspiration of opening his own weapon shop. If that isn't enough of a shock, the actual gameplay starts with you getting a packed lunch from your gorgeous wife. Now, what you will probably end up doing is walking to the town's own weapon shop where you work as the clerk for the owner. You literally step behind the counter and random character come in asking to buy and sell weapons. You pick YES/NO answers as to wheter you want to display your stock, buy or sell items. Some characters will even notice they can't equip a certain item and ask if you will still sell it to them. Items that the store doesn't usually carry only appear after you bought it, and disappear as soon as someone else buys them (which can include yourself).

Now, this may sound simple, but makes the world of Dragon Quest suddenly much richer. Anyone who has played console RPGs knows that most cities feel like cardboard cutouts, with plain buildings lacking regular facilities (when was the last time you saw a toilet in a RPG?) and people repeating the same sentence over and over... this little stunt makes you feel for all those guys behind counters in all these games. The game is full of little tricks like this in a smaller scale, like have certain characters follow you then settle in different towns, and making the world feel like a living, breathing landscape.

I don't know that anyone ever named this kind of quality, but I like to call it "texture". Very much like taste is the primary factor in food, gameplay usually is the first thing we look in terms of a videogame. But even in culinary the texture can make or break a dish... and these little touches really can separate a bland game from a great game. I still remember to this day how I used a glass bottle in Zelda: Ocarina of Time in a small pond with a fish... and I managed to get it! Most games would not have bothered with this kind of detail, but it really makes the experience so much nicer for the player.

Obviously, certain games can get an even bigger boost from this quality. Management games like SimCity, and it really makes them stick on the player's memory. Seeing every single person in your theme park let go of their balloon at the same time when you completed your goal in Rollercoaster Tycoon was always a thrill.

Feedback is everything.

Retracing steps

Those who follow the career of Shigeru Miyamoto (possibly the most famous videogame designer in the world) probably heard some of the stories about his childhood and how those defined him in this profession. I had a similar experience yesterday, and it was quite revealing.

Miyamoto tells the story on how he would walk around his neighborhood during his youth and once he ventured into a cave he was afraid of, and the excitement and surprise of his discoveries would fuel his creativity for games such as Super Mario Brothers and Zelda. I think I experienced a bit of this, as I was driving through a part of town that was near to places I go to a lot, but some entirely new streets.

I know it may sound stupid, but there was an amazingly beautiful blue sky, and I suddenly found myself feeling somewhat alien to this city I have been living in for my whole life. It was a little tug of wonder with a dash of discovery and a lot of excitement. I realize that place had been there all along, just a few steps from places I drive by almost daily... and yet, it was completely unknown and just waiting to be discovered.

I find it interesting that one of the cool responses to this sensation was an impulse to try and just explore other streets I have yet to traverse, as if these places are just lurking there, waiting to be discovered. It's that same drive to press DOWN when you see a pipe in a Mario game... you never know exactly what you are going to get.

People who can translate those experiences into games are bound to be the geniuses of game design as an art... and hopefully they will define where this art form goes.