Author Archive | Jared Newman

Twitter No Longer Cares About What You’re Doing

Posted by Jared Newman on November 19, 2009 at 4:38 pm

Though not as noticeable as Retweets or Lists, Twitter has stopped asking users the completely uninteresting question, “What are you doing?”

Instead, the social messaging service now asks, “What’s happening?” It’s a simple alteration that could help point new users in a different, less mundane direction. Or, in the words of Twitter co-founder Biz Stone, “maybe it’ll make it easier to explain to your dad.”

Twitter is catching up to its users, who in large part abandoned the literal description of their activities long ago. My feed might not be an indication of everyone else’s, but looking at the last 40 tweets in my timeline, only six are descriptions of what the person is up to. Stone has noticed the same thing. “Between those cups of coffee, people are witnessing accidents, organizing events, sharing links, breaking news, reporting stuff their dad says, and so much more,” he writes.

I wish Twitter had picked up on this shift sooner, because I think a lot of people missed the point of the service during its rise to the mainstream this year. After Twitter traffic ramped up sharply from February to April, it took an 8 percent dive in October, according to comscore. Anecdotally, I’ve got a lot of professional contacts and colleagues using Twitter in cool ways, but my actual friends tend to broadcast their activities a few times, get bored, and quit.

Some companies have missed the boat, too. Look at the integration of Twitter into Xbox Live and the launch of TwitterPeek, a bare-bones tweeting device. Neither are well-suited to what Twitter has become, because you can’t upload photos or look at videos, and TwitterPeek has a minimal Web browser while the Xbox 360 doesn’t have one at all. Users of these tools are pushed towards a “What are you doing?” mentality, and they’ll get tired of it.

Harry has said there’s no right or wrong way to use Twitter, but hopefully this small change in wording will steer people towards a usage that they’ll actually enjoy.

No comments

Xbox Live, Facebook and Twitter: Incompatible

Posted by Jared Newman on November 17, 2009 at 5:10 pm

Here’s a telling moment from my first experiences with social networking on Xbox Live: While rifling through status updates on Facebook, I spotted a comment that seemed worthy of a response, which would’ve taken forever to type on my controller. Also, there was a Web link which the Xbox 360 couldn’t access. So I got off the couch, walked into the next room, and typed out a response on my computer, then spent the next five minutes looking at the Web site in question.

That’s a failure, and it carries over to Xbox Live’s Twitter implementation as well. Both features went live on the Xbox 360 today along with Last.fm’s Internet radio service and the Zune Marketplace, a facelift for the console’s existing video storefront that includes 1080p video and online movie-watching parties.

Of all the new features, I’m mostly interested in how the Xbox 360 does social networking. With Sony readying Facebook support on the Playstation 3, and the PS3 blockbuster Uncharted 2 allowing you to post in-game progress to Twitter, the games industry seems to be latching on to social networking.

Input is the obvious problem. Unless you spring for a $30 Xbox 360 Messenger Kit (which you’re cheerily reminded about when starting up Facebook), both networks feel trapped behind glass. You can read what other people are doing, but participating is a chore.

However, the feeling of looking-but-no-touching goes beyond input. On Twitter, you can’t visit Web pages because the console doesn’t have a Web browser. That’s too bad, because external links are as much a part of Twitter as the things people say. Facebook suffers from the same problem, and more: You can’t add friends, you can’t use apps and you can’t modify your profile. You can’t even poke people.

The major problem is that Facebook and Twitter are made for the open Internet, while the Xbox 360 is a walled garden. Looking at full-screen photo albums in Facebook is a redeeming quality, but ultimately social networking is incompatible with the closed system of consoles. I don’t expect to use Facebook or Twitter on the Xbox 360 too often, and when Facebook comes to the Playstation 3, I’m not expecting a markedly better experience.

11 comments

Needed at Apple: One Good Game Designer

Posted by Jared Newman on November 16, 2009 at 4:36 pm

Apple’s cooking up something related to video games, and needs a jack of all trades game designer to get the job done.

Apple appears candid in the job ad. The company wants someone to work on “interactive multimedia experiences” (read: video games) on the iPhone and iPod Touch. The right person must be a “passionate gamer” with three years of industry experience, at least one shipped AAA title and knowledge of a few programming languages, among other skills.

Normally, I wouldn’t care much about job openings at Apple, but this particular posting has me wondering, “Why?” Apple only sells four in-house apps on the iPhone and iPod Touch, and just one of them, Texas Hold’em, is a game. My understanding is that the App Store is primarily a hardware seller for Apple, and with so many third-party games available, it just doesn’t seem worthwhile for Apple to compete.

The Apple Blog’s Liam Cassidy, however, has an intriguing suggestion: Apple’s really looking for someone to develop in-house games for the still rumored Apple tablet. That’ll give the company something to show on stage if and when the large touch screen device is revealed.

In a way, it makes perfect sense. Apple’s tablet is shrouded in secrecy, so imagine the risk of handing off early development to a third-party publisher. All it takes is one well-connected game journalist to blow the story wide open. It might not even come to that — look at how New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller may have slipped up by referring to the “impending Apple slate” during an internal speech. Better to keep development under wraps in Cupertino.

Still, there’s a big hole in I can’t reconcile: If Apple’s only looking for someone to create demo fodder, isn’t this more of a temp job than a full-time position? Indeed, I can’t think of any reason for the existence of this position that doesn’t have at least one good counter-argument. Even the idea of Apple developing a gaming console seems far-fetched and silly.

Whatever the job is, I have a feeling the new hire will be signing a thick NDA upon arrival.

4 comments

Call for “Real” iPhone Game Reviews is Almost a Bribe

Posted by Jared Newman on November 13, 2009 at 6:21 pm

Supposedly fed up with “the tide of fake App Store reviews,” iPhone game developer G5 entertainment wants your honest opinion, and plans to get it by giving away free games.

For its latest release, Judgment Day War, G5 is looking for reviews in exchange for a chance to win one of its earlier games. Before submitting your review to the App Store, you send it to reviews@g5e.com, along with your App Store user name, and the developer picks the 50 reviews that it deems most “interesting.”

I’ll note that the press release skillfully avoids defining what an “interesting” review might entail, lest that definition be interpreted as “thumbs up.” It doesn’t say whether overly negative reviews and enthusiastically positive ones will be judged equally, but there isn’t any encouragement to stay fair and balanced either.

Fake App Store reviews aren’t unheard of. In August, MobileCrunch ran an exposé on Reverb Communications, whose staff was caught writing positive reviews of clients’ games (Reverb insisted that the reviews were written on the staffers’ own time, based on their own experiences, and said that if Reverb didn’t like the games to begin with, “we wouldn’t take them on as clients.”) Other instances abound, as reported by BusinessWeek.

Are G5’s tactics as sleazy as the rest? Not quite, because the developer isn’t soliciting positive opinions and directly compensating for them, but something about it still stinks. If G5 really wants to contribute to an App Store that’s free of fraudulent reviews, it can do its part by butting out.

One comment

GameStop Will Sell Digital Downloads. Writing on Wall Spotted?

Posted by Jared Newman on November 12, 2009 at 4:10 pm

GameStop’s tentacles are wrapped pretty tightly around most of the games industry, the exception being downloadable content that’s sold after a game is released.

That’ll change early next year, when the retailer will begin selling digital game downloads through its stores. A report from Reuters doesn’t explain in detail how this will work, but my understanding is that you pay at the store and supply GameStop with your Xbox Live Gamertag or your Playstation Network user name, and the content will be ready for download when you get home.

Boxed retail games aren’t dead yet, so you’ll still have reason to visit GameStop in the first place. The retailer hopes that by visiting the store, you’ll learn about new content that might’ve flown under your radar — say, additional multiplayer maps for Modern Warfare 2 — and instead of reminding yourself to buy it once you’re home, you can just make the transaction right there.

The problem is that GameStop’s plan doesn’t add value for the buyer. It’s nice to be reminded that map packs are available, but that doesn’t make the store any less of a middleman. This is an issue the retailer will increasingly have to deal with as more people get their gaming content online instead of at the store.

For now, I’d suggest that GameStop get creative with how it sells downloadable content. Maybe it can work with publishers on selling all-you-can-eat passes, entitling you to all a game’s extra content in exchange for one up-front payment. Everyone wins: GameStop gets the extra revenue, the publishers feel safe knowing you won’t immediately trade the game back, and you get a discount. Or maybe the retailer can simply lure people into the store by with launch parties for the new content. That’s at least a service that isn’t being duplicated at home, and avoiding redundancy is GameStop’s best bet, now and in the long haul.

No comments

Disney World’s Space Mountain Gets Video Games, But I Miss Crazy Larry!

Posted by Jared Newman on November 11, 2009 at 4:56 pm

space2SMALL If you’ve ever been to Disney World or Disneyland, particularly at a young age, chances are you’ll view any news about the theme parks through a lens of nostalgia.

That was my experience at least, reading about how Disney World will add video games to the wait line for Space Mountain. According to Disney Parks’ official blog, at some point in the line you’ll get to play a 90-second game of defend-the-base, cooperating with 85 fellow parkgoers to deflect asteroids away from a runway.

It’s not clear how the game is played. From the photo, it looks like there’s a very simple controller you use, maybe to fire away at the incoming space rocks. There’s a 90-second interval between each game, allowing people to shuffle along once they’re done playing, and the game is supposedly tied into a larger story related to Space Mountain, as if you need narrative when you’re hurling down a steel track at 25 miles per hour.

I could wax nostalgic about all sorts of Disney stuff at this point, but for the sake of staying relevant to Technologizer, I just want to fondly remember Crazy Larry, the spaceship salesman who appeared on “SMTV” from the mid 1990s until 2005. SMTV was a video, sponsored by FedEx, that played throughout the Space Mountain line, and Crazy Larry (see 1:10 in this video) was clearly a sendup of Crazy Eddie, the electronics retailer that went belly up in 1989.

Even though I couldn’t have been more than 6 years old when Jerry Carroll did his Crazy Eddie bit on TV, I immediately made the connection with Crazy Larry. The Crazy Eddie commercials left that much of an impression on my young mind. Shady business practices aside, the store’s management knew how to pitch electronics.

2 comments

You Didn’t Need That Modern Warfare 2 Pre-Order

Posted by Jared Newman on November 10, 2009 at 5:07 pm

So I’ve been thinking about fulfilling my duties as a game journalist and buying Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, even though my plate is pretty full at the moment (I’m deep into Demon’s Souls, if you’re wondering).

One potential snag: Modern Warfare 2 is, at least according to GameStop, “the biggest entertainment launch of all time.” I wondered if all the people who pre-ordered the game or hit up a midnight launch last night hogged all the copies. Would my lack of early commitment be a problem? Not in my neck of the woods.

The three closest GameStops to my apartment in Venice, Calif., all said I could grab a copy for Playstation 3 or Xbox 360, no problem. One employee even answered the phone by saying, “Thank you for calling GameStop … where we have Modern Warfare 2 in stock.” Best Buy’s Web site also listed the game as available for in-store pickup at my three nearest locations.

So, why pre-order? Certainly, it’s useful for big hardware launches and limited edition bundles (such as Modern Warfare 2’s night vision-equipped Prestige Edition), but I don’t remember the last time I couldn’t find a game anywhere because I didn’t order in advance.

Increasingly, pre-ordering is about locking you into a purchase instead of a rental, and this is often accomplished with swag or in-game goodies. For instance, if you pre-order the upcoming Mass Effect 2, you get a special suit of armor to wear in the game. If you pre-order Left 4 Dead 2, you get to play the demo as an appetizer.

Modern Warfare 2 didn’t have any great pre-order bonuses. A reservation with GameStop, lets you get $40 back if you trade the game in by December 13, but that’s hardly enough time to play the single -player campaign and sink into the game’s multiplayer.

My point is, next time you buy something from GameStop, and the clerk offers you a pre-order on some title that’s two months away, see what incentives they’re putting on the table. If they don’t excite you, relax. You’ll still be able to get a copy on launch day.

4 comments

Will EA Lead a Games Industry Deflation?

Posted by Jared Newman on November 9, 2009 at 4:12 pm

Electronic Arts shared some good news and bad news today. First, the company acquired Facebook game maker Playfish for up to $400 million, but then EA announced that it will lay off 1,500 employees and close some of its game development studios.

VentureBeat’s Dean Takahashi has a good summary of today’s events, if you’re into the business side of things, but what’s really interesting is the way that EA is scooping out a significant chunk of the company.

Think of EA as a gigantic tower of game publishing. At the top are your high-budget, high-sales franchises, such Madden football, FIFA soccer, Need for Speed, Rock Band, Mass Effect and Left 4 Dead 2. At the bottom are EA’s smaller-scale ventures, such as mobile games and now social networking games from Playfish. The higher up the tower you go, the higher the production values, and the bigger the risk if the game tanks.

EA is essentially chopping off the middle part of the tower. Chief executive John Riccitiello said the company will now invest more in high-priority games (the stuff at the top) and digital businesses (the stuff at the bottom). Smart move, I think.

As I’ve written before, the games industry is facing a crisis now, and not just because of the recession. The cost of game development is spiraling exponentially upwards, leaving less room than ever for error. This is not a sustainable strategy, especially for B-list video games, because a gamer could easily limit his or her $60 game purchases to the best dozen titles of the year and still be perfectly happy.

The way down from this endless spiral is to focus on smaller-scale gaming. One way to do this is with cheaper, simpler downloadable games, such as the Xbox 360 hit Shadow Complex. EA, meanwhile, is muscling up in the mobile and social space. All these strategies are good antidotes for out-of-control game development costs.

So while it pains me to see that 1,500 people will lose their jobs, it had to happen this way.

No comments

Steam Snag: Digital Retailers Boycott Modern Warfare 2

Posted by Jared Newman on November 6, 2009 at 4:59 pm

Just days before Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is released, several digital retailers have decided not to sell the game.

Is it because of that controversial scene where the player acts out a terrorist attack? Nope. It’s because the game’s PC version uses Steamworks, a software platform for multiplayer match creation, downloadable content and anti-piracy measures. Direct2Drive, Impulse and GamersGate say they oppose the forced installation of third-party software on players’ computers (Direct2Drive calls Steamworks “a Trojan Horse”), and so they are sitting out on the biggest computer game of 2009. Bold move.

Of course, that’s only the official story. Steamworks is a part of Steam, Valve’s digital distribution service that happens to compete with the boycotting retailers. As 1UP so eloquently put it, “having to fire up Steam to play the game you bought from Direct2Drive is a lot like having to walk through a McDonald’s every time you want to eat a Whopper,” so you can understand the retailers’ position.

The bigger issue is that Modern Warfare 2 is taking away many of the things PC gamers love about PC gaming. Last month, chaos ensued when developer Infinity Ward said there would be no dedicated servers allowed for multiplayer matches. Instead, everything will be handled though a console-style matchmaking system, and the game won’t support user-created mods either. (Ars Technica has a nice rundown of how messy this situation has become).

The forced implementation of Steamworks ties into those earlier developments as a way of controlling the PC gaming environment, and making it more like the Xbox 360 or Playstation 3. The problem is, that’s not what PC gamers want. Modern Warfare 2 will probably sell well on the PC anyway, but it’ll be a neutered experience, and one that hurts the free spirit of PC gaming as a whole.

20 comments

Art, Game or Trojan? Don’t Be the Judge!

Posted by Jared Newman on November 4, 2009 at 2:02 pm

loselose The folks at Symantec have looked right past the artistic intent behind Lose/Lose, a computer game that deletes your files every time you shoot an alien, because they’ve just classified the game as a Mac Trojan.

Lose/Lose is described by its creator as “a game with real life consequences.” It’s a standard space shooter in the spirit of Galaga, except that each alien is assigned to a file on your hard drive. Blast the alien, and the file is gone forever, for real. Getting hit by an alien crashes the game, never to be played again. Here’s what creator Zach Gage says about the project:

By way of exploring what it means to kill in a video-game, Lose/Lose broaches bigger questions. As technology grows, our understanding of it diminishes, yet, at the same time, it becomes increasingly important in our lives. At what point does our virtual data become as important to us as physical possessions?

When I read about the game on Make a couple months ago, I chuckled at the concept, watched the video and wisely skipped trying the game for myself.

Symantec, on the other hand, dubbed the game a Trojan, gave it a name (“OSX.Loosemaque”) and created a threat assessment. Most amusing is how Symantec employee and blogger Ben Nahorney acknowledges Gage’s intent: “What’s interesting is that the author of this ‘game’ flat-out says what it does on his Web site,” Nahorney writes. “Reading through the author’s description, it seems that he has created this game/threat as some sort of artistic project.”

Still, Nahorney follows with a valid point, that someone with truly bad intentions could modify Lose/Lose’s code and distribute a game that doesn’t pronounce its file-deleting capabilities outright. So next time you download some obscure, simplistic alien-shooting game from the Internet, consider yourself warned.

3 comments

← Previous 1 … 71 72 73 … 96 Next →