The Dilemma of GTA on the DS

As of late, I’ve been getting back into my DS a bit. It’s not taking over for my Xbox, but I’m probably going to start posting a bit about it from now on as well. Over the last week or two a number of press outlets have examined the low sales of Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars and asked some good questions about what this means for mature gaming on the DS. I figured I’d post my own speculated answers for those questions.

The setup: Kotaku does a good job of explaining the situation. That’s where I’m getting these numbers from. In short, there are 100 million DS consoles in the world with 1,100 titles available. Of those titles, only seven are mature rated. In March, GTA: Chinatown Wars sold only 89,000 copies. It is worth noting that GTA: Chinatown Wars was only on shelves for two weeks, but that’s still some low numbers for such a hyped franchise.

The Brainy Gamer has an article which explores more numbers comparing other DS games. He does a good job of pointing out that DS games don’t sell like most console games. They have “legs” or “a long tail”, which means they sell over a long period of time. Unfortunately GTA IV was one console game that sold great at launch and had almost no legs. I don’t know if that will translate to the handheld, but to my mind it’s worth noting. At the end of the article Mr. Abbott poses several questions, and rather than add my answers to his comments I thought I would post them here in my blog:

1. Is the large fanbase for GTA games uninterested in playing an old-school top-down version of the game? Now that players have visited Liberty City in high-detail 3D, is there simply no going back? I confess that I don’t own, or intend on owning, GTA IV. I’ve just never been one for the franchise, preferring my open-world games to feature superheroes. That being said, I think this is the problem many franchises face with the DS: do you try to shrink the console mechanic or offer something suited to the handheld? While I’m not going to say that fans are fully committed to the 3D design, I think the change in perspective degrades any ties the handheld will have to its big brother. Not necessarily a bad thing…

2. Does the DS audience today comprise enough people who want to play a GTA game on their handheld? Did Rockstar overestimate the size of this segment of DS owners? Did Rockstar wrongly assume the game would be a system-seller for “hardcore” gamers who don’t own a DS? I doubt this game is a system seller. I do think it’s fair to say that there’s probably a good percentage of people who bought GTA IV on name alone who don’t have a DS. My supposition is that Rockstar thought there was a large number of hardcore gamers, such as myself, who own a DS because they own major consoles, and that those gamers would be hungry for a game that doesn’t feature cooking or ponies. I think the audience is there, I just don’t know if they realize it or not.

3. Are we simply GTA’d out? Coming so closely on the heels of GTA IV, are fans less excited by the arrival of a new GTA game? I don’t think GTA IV hurt the DS game as much as I think the DLC Lost and Damned did hurt it. Partly since it would satiate the thirst of gamers, and partly because there were a lot of gamers that didn’t feel they got enough “new” content (the press thought there was tons of new content, so this may be a point worth ignoring). Why buy more of the same? Again I think the game may be hurt by its ties to the console big brother since it really stands on its own feet.

4. Do current DS owners see GTA:CW as a Grand Theft Auto game they won’t know how to play? In other words, is the game unlikely to bring new players into the GTA fold because it’s perceived to be a spin-off of a next-gen console game they’ve never played? Being a non-player of the console game, I can say this is a good point. It’s not that gamers wouldn’t know how to play it, but more that DS gamers don’t perceive GTA: Chinatown Wars as a unique and enticing DS game. They’re seeing the franchise, not the game.

5. Is an M-rated game on a Nintendo platform simply too incongruous to succeed beyond minor niche hits like No More Heroes? I would have said that M-rated games can survive on Nintendo platforms, but given the troubles of Mad World and House of the Dead: Overkill I just don’t know. I’d like to say that the problem probably rests in getting the word out to the mature gaming public. I think that the gamers who are following the DS news are not your key demographic, so you need to find ways to draw that demographic in.

6. Could Rockstar have done anything differently? Did their choice to deliver a full-on, unfiltered GTA game seal their doom? Should we salute their integrity or question their business accumen? My coppout: both. I salute their integrity and from what I’ve heard they delivered. I question their accumen not because of the product, but because it’s not reaching the right consumers. I think it’s clear that if you want to reach mature gamers you can’t let Nintendo do it for you.

I wanted to include a question from Ben Fritz over at Variety’s Cut Scene: “Are you willing to bet there are a million adult owners of a DS who weren’t interested in “Chinatown Wars” last month but will buy it at some point in the future?” Ben’s not, but I am. Why? Because I’m one of them. I’m not sold on the franchise, but this installment looks like a fun game from what I’ve seen. I just wish that Rockstar didn’t hide it so much from other gamers like me.

Another Delayed Post

Unfortunately my power has been out most of the weekend, so I yet again have to postpone my post. I promise it’ll be up tomorrow. Stupid hydro.

On XNA Community Games

A little while ago GameSetWatch put up some articles dealing with the Microsoft XNA Creator’s Club and the resulting numbers. I decided there were a few things on the topic worth saying, and thought I’d put down my thoughts on the subject.

To begin with, I’d like to say that I think the concept is fantastic. While not everyone knows C#, this definitely gives more individuals the opportunity to create games than before. I think it’s nice that enthusiasts who have played games for years have the chance not only to make their own games, but to share them with others. This innovation is definitely Microsoft improving on the already deep community they created when they began Xbox Live. My excitement was increased when I first heard about The Dishwasher: Dead Samurai, though I was disappointed in how long it took for that to finally come to XBLA.

Since the implementation of the community games there’s been a great deal of “backlash” at Microsoft suggesting that they’ve botched the job in handling these new games. I agree with certain complaints in this department, but not all. For starters: it’s damn hard to find great new games on there. They really do need a rating system of some sort that you can sort using (ie. only five-star games or four stars and up, etc.). Right now your best chance is the most popular tab, but that can get stale, and it doesn’t necessarily represent the best games available (I’m looking at you Rumble Massage). So I would have to say that the rating system is the number one problem for the process. The second is putting out games. Unlike the weekly release schedule of Xbox Live Arcade games, the community games get posted seemingly at random, and in large quantities. There can be anywhere from four to seven games a week dropping on this service. I understand that it’s contradictory to applaud open user-generated content and then ask for limits to be imposed, but some sort of order and regularity would be nice. I think that because of this poor release process many quality games get pushed away before people get a chance to try them. And the third issue I have is that no sales data was released until four months into the program, and then it was only to the creators. When you have a project like this I think that it behoves them to make data available for people to understand how the service is doing. I think a lot of potential creators were hesitant to invest a year of their time on a hobby when the service might get dropped because it didn’t succeed in the first six months and so games were moved out the door before they could grow.

With all that being said, I think there are a few things I have to stand up for Microsoft on. Most importantly, this service is meant for hobbyists and not independent developers. James Silva (of The Dishwasher: Dead Samurai) had a good point when he said “A lot of small studios are pretty mad about sales,” he told us. “I would be too if I’d rented an office suite, hired programmers, artists, and a PR chick, and was looking at a few thousand in sales. However, since my costs are just… rent… I’m pretty happy… For a small studio, [Community Games] is sure to be a letdown, but for a guy coding in his pajamas (mine are chef’s pants still, in fact, I’m wearing them right now), it’s awesome.” I think this point needs a little extra emphasis: XNA Creator’s Club was not meant to support independent game studios. It was meant to be a way for people who had other jobs to try their hand creatively in a hobby during their spare time. I think there are a lot of individuals who saw an opportunity to exploit this aspect of the community for independent game design and are now disappointed with the results. While I understand why they might be upset, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for them. A lot of games are being offered up on the community tab for 400 MS points, which used to be the regular XBLA price tag. Now XBLA has moved up to 800 MS points, but I still have that old price in my mind. I bought Worms for 400 MS points and when I see community games at that price I feel like they ought to be better and be full XBLA titles.

I’ve always felt that XBLA ought to be a breeding ground for excellent independent studios. Now I don’t know the financials behind everything, and maybe you make a larger percentage of community games, but in my mind if you’re looking to become a full-time operation you ought to be making games for XBLA and not the community games. I would never expect to be paying for someone’s mortgage when I buy a community game, and I think that’s the popular perspective. I’m not saying that Microsoft ought not to support the independent segment of the industry. I just think that this part of their empire isn’t directed towards anything so grandiose.

While I do accept that the community games project still has a long way to go, I want to point out that there are a lot of games worth checking out in there. Two that you really should see are Groove and Miner Dig Deep. While the former wasn’t for me I was hooked on the latter almost instantly. I would strongly encourage users to take the time to browse through the community games and download some demos. You never know what hidden jewel you might find.

What I’m Not Playing: A Demo Rundown

Taking a page from the MTV Multiplayer blog, I thought I’d post my first impressions regarding a number of demos I’ve played recently and why I’m not playing the full games right now. Here we go:

Watchmen: The End is Nigh: I’m a huge fan of Alan Moore. I loved the Watchmen comic, and I think the film was a solid adaptation. I’m pretty much the target for this style of game. I have to give respect to the developers for making a downloadable game rather than a really crappy disc game. Unfortunately I don’t think they did much better. I do have to say that the graphics are awesome, and the voice-over comics for cutscenes fit well. If you need all things Watchmen then you’ll want it for that. The actual mechanics are clunky though. While playing I thought this is what a 3D Double Dragon would look like. You have a strong attack, a week attack, a power attack, and you can pick up objects enemies drop (ie. tire irons). Unfortunately the meat is missing. I played through the demo twice (once as Rorschach and once as Nite Owl) and was tired of it before I started the second time.
Why I’m not playing it: Watchmen just isn’t really a videogame property. If anything, a game based on this should be more detective based (point-and-click perhaps).

The Dishwasher: Dead Samurai: This game is the one that makes fanboys dream because James Silva is just a regular gamer who wanted to make a game and got his chance. I’d heard about this XBLA title a long time ago and eagerly awaited a quasi-retro move-right brawler. I think the demo makes a good impression of what the game holds. You have a variety of moves based on combinations of button presses, and you definitely get rewarded for dealing with enemies in a variety of ways. There’s a store to buy additional health and upgrades as you would expect. The presentation is probably the part I like the most, the story being told through comic strips in-between levels. I’d heard that the game was challenging, and it really is. Not one for the casual crowd I’m afraid.
Why I’m not playing it: I didn’t finish the demo. I admit that it’s more of a challenge than I want right now. Worth checking out, just not worth 800 MSpoints to me.

Wanted: Weapons of Fate: I’ve never read the graphic novel, but I rented the movie Wanted and enjoyed it. I was excited for the game, especially hearing that they picked up after the movie left off and released long after the DVD to take the time to execute a great game. The demo plays pretty good. I liked the graphics, and the implementation of the special techniques (curving bullets, slowing time, disorienting targets) is slick. On the whole I was pretty sold on this as the next third-person cover-based shooter I would purchase.
Why I’m not playing it: Apparently the game is really short. I don’t care that it doesn’t have multiplayer (that’s actually a bit of a selling point), but I can’t justify the cost of $60 for only four or five hours of play time. I can also see how the mechanics can get a bit stale (how many times do you curve a bullet before it gets tired?). I’m still interested in the game, but probably when it drops to $20 or less.

The Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena: I think this one wins our battle of the colons this week. Like Mitch Krpata at Insult Swordfighting, I think Starbreeze gets a free pass from me for The Darkness. I love that game, and I had heard such great things about The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher’s Bay that I wanted to like this game. Then I played it. The graphics are awesome, and I’m sure the controls work when you have some time to acclimatize to them. I also wish that the demo showed some of the original game rather than only the sequel chapters.
Why I’m not playing it: Something about this game just didn’t stick for me. Maybe I’m just not good at stealth games, but I found myself dying more than was fun for me. I’m sure others will have a good time with this, but I spent my time wishing Riddick’s muscle shirt was made of Kevlar.

Afro Samurai: What, no colon in the title? Somebody must have made a mistake. I really enjoyed the first season of Afro Samurai, even if I found it a bit short. Nevertheless, I wanted to like this game. A third-person brawler with awesome swordplay. I’d heard/read somewhere that they had layered the character models so that Afro cut through clothes as well as flesh and you could do cool things like slice off the tops of peoples’ heads. The combat is pretty damn cool, which is good because the game really is just wave after wave of enemies. The art is truly fantastic. This game looks as great as every cartoon-based game ought to. I was almost ready to buy it based on the intro alone.
Why I’m not playing it: It would appear that the camera was stolen from Ninja Gaiden II. I swear it is conscious of my presence and is out to make my experience awful. I had to stop playing the demo. A camera this bad kills a game for me.

There’s a quick, if a bit longer than usual, rundown of some of the demos I’ve played lately. I’ve got some other posts brewing regarding community games and the DSi, but we’ll see what solidifies for next week. Until then, stay frosty kids.

On Game Criticism Part Four – Criticism Itself

This is the fourth and final post in a series which I have been doing over the last few weeks. Each one examined a portion of the current situation and challenge of video-game criticism.

This final post is really about establishing an identity for a dialogue. What I’m talking about is videogame criticism. I’ve been using that term over the last three posts pretty liberally without really discussing what I mean by videogame criticism. Here I want to present a kind of definition and establish just how criticism is different from reviewing.

As Wikipedia explains, criticism is a form of analysis or interpretation where a critic attempts to extrapolate meaning and understanding from a medium, most often art. There are a number of individuals out there who participate in this type of venture. Most of them are developers, such as Clint Hocking at Click Nothing. I think there’s a lot to be gained from developer/designer blogs such as Mr. Hocking’s, but I think that’s merely the first level of criticism: criticism by the artist. Unfortunately criticism by the artist or craftsperson is often limited to their own creations, or at best a small segment of the industry. While these analyses often blaze a trail by examining the details of an art from it’s origins and the creative process, as well as establishing some of the jargon which enables critical debate, they also often lack the benefit of external examination which opens up an art form to interdisciplinary approaches and more generalist perspectives.

The next level of analysis is underway as well, of course. You needn’t go any further than Michael Abbott over at The Brainy Gamer. There we have a scholar, not a developer, applying the tools he has accumulated from previous critical traditions to videogames. This semi-professional criticism begins to move criticism towards an open and general understanding. What I mean by “open and general” is one that removes videogames from the isolated locale of gaming and establishes it alongside the world in which it exists (i.e. economics, gender, other art forms, etc.). This form of hobbiest criticism is exciting and full of potential, but it’s not enough.

Where does videogame criticism need to go from here? So long as criticism and analysis remain the domain of either craftspeople or hobbiests there can be no significant historical progression. I say significant because the line between these two categories is somewhat blurred, and often yesteryear’s hobbiest is now this year’s artist. However, the community is still left without a solid knowledge of itself as a whole, and what analysis is offered is often disjointed and repeated. As the field of criticism narrows and becomes more self-aware I believe that there will be a progression of theory and criticism specific to videogaming. We are already seeing a narrowing as blogs link to one another, tightening the virtual community. Over time, and enthusiast may find that most critics are listening to one another, and a dialogue is beginning to establish itself with veritable experts examining the spectrum of the medium.

I don’t think it’s enough, however, to make claims as what videogame criticism is. I think we need to also establish what it is not. The proverbial elephant in this room is reviews. The vernacular use of the term “criticism” is often one of discouragement, or describing short comings. As such, many people confuse the idea of criticism as analysis with that of criticism relating the shortcomings of a game. That type of criticism belongs in the realm of reviews, but should not be alone. A review should be critical, in so far as it should analyse the game as a whole, and should relate both the short comings and the successes of a game. I think that the community often over looks the latter even though many reviewers go out of their way to include at least something promising about a game. This, however, is not criticism. Reviews are an evaluation, not an extrapolation. I think that reviews are important, and they are an excellent place to use the tools of criticism, but they are not equal with true criticism.

So what’s the next step? I think we need to push the boundaries of academic study and community discourse. As time goes on, I believe we’ll find these on-line communities will push criticism even further. From there we will find more magazines and journals (print is not dead) bringing together ideas and articles of criticism until the community finds its own way. We just need to give it a little time and a push in the right direction.

Whew… That’s enough of that pontificating. Next week I’m going to get back to the games!

A slight delay

Due to an illness in the family, I won’t be updating until quite late today. I may be delayed until as late as Monday morning.