Jul 18

GamePro reports NPD sales data:

Console June sales
Wii 666,700
PS3 405,500
Xbox 360 219,800
PS2 188,800

Of note, these are sales to end users, not number of consoles shipped; Microsoft prefers to cite the latter.

The Wii is now the #1 console in the US by installed base. So it seems as though as predicted, the Xbox 360’s best days could be behind it.

Once Sony got their act together and shipped a bundle with the rumble controller packaged along with the console, sales took off. When the 80GB PS3 with rumble controller replaces the current 40GB package, expect sales to rise again. It won’t take long to erase the lead in installed base Microsoft has.

This week, people are making a big thing about the announcement that Final Fantasy XIII is going to be cross-platform, appearing on the 360 as well as the PS3–but only in the US, as nobody in Japan has a 360.

I don’t see the Final Fantasy announcement as all that big of a deal, when you look at all the former Xbox exclusives that are now on the PS3 or will be soon.

  • Saints Row was the Xbox’s supposed GTA-killer, and Saints Row 2 is going to be on PS3.
  • BioShock was the 360’s highest rated game of 2007 on Metacritic. It’s now coming to PS3, with "graphical improvements".
  • Half-Life ’s developer Valve was always a staunch Microsoft supporter, with Half-Life 2 an Xbox exclusive–but The Orange Box came out for PS3 earlier this year. (I’ve picked up a copy–FPSs aren’t really my thing, but I want to play Portal.)
  • Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion made it onto the PS3.
  • Dead or Alive 4 is being ported, and it’s rumored that the sequel may be PS3 exclusive.
  • Ridge Racer 6 was Xbox 360 only, Ridge Racer 7 switched to PS3 only.
  • Full Auto was Xbox 360 only, Full Auto 2 is on PS3.

So looking at the high profile well-reviewed Xbox exclusives, that leaves Command and Conquer, Project Gotham Racing, Mass Effect, Gears of War, and of course Halo. (Dead Rising is heading to the Wii, along with Beautiful Katamari.) It’s a good job Microsoft bought so many game companies, or they would hardly have any exclusives left at this point.

So the video game industry will avoid Microsoft domination for another generation. I think this is a good thing.

May 30

In part 1, I talked about the development of video games to date. I explained how we ended up with games with complex multi-path plots, and games with worlds modeled in true 3D. However, game developers started to hit problems when they began trying to build 3D games with complex plots…

The complexity problem

The issue of managing game complexity had been discovered by text adventure programmers back in the 80s. If you give the player a single tool (a gun) and a single set of adversaries (invading aliens), the number of possible interactions you have to program responses for is very limited. The player needs to be able to fire the gun, maybe reload the gun, perhaps pick up additional ammunition or other types of gun. The gun is either successfully targeted at an enemy when fired, in which case some damage is done to the enemy, or it isn’t.

Now consider a world in which the player has a gun, a flashlight, a screwdriver, and some health-giving combat rations; and suppose the enemy base has locked doors and guard dogs. What if the player tries to club an enemy to death with the flashlight? What if he tries to distract a guard dog with the food rations? What if he tries to open a locked door by unscrewing the hinges? Suddenly the number of possible actions the player can take increases significantly. In mathematical terms, there is a combinatorial explosion, as each object can potentially interact with every other object, and the game designer needs to decide what will happen for each combination. Even if the answer is “nothing relevant happens”, that’s still a design decision that must be made. Furthermore, too many “nothing happens” or “you can’t do that” responses will destroy the player’s suspension of disbelief, or even become outright annoying.

So as the complexity of the new realistically-drawn 3D worlds increased, the problem of making those worlds behave realistically increased much faster.

In addition, text adventure programmers discovered that providing players with genuine choices led to increased complexity. What if the knight sacrifices his henchman to escape the dragon? Who will perform the actions the henchman would have performed in the game? What about the fact that there’s still a dragon roaming around, shouldn’t that impact the plot?

Most satisfyingly complex plot-driven video games found a convenient solution to these problems: they put many completely arbitrary restrictions on what the player could do, in order to ensure that the plot didn’t “break”.

To see how these restrictions are enforced, it suffices to look at the Final Fantasy series of games, which became incredibly successful after Final Fantasy VII introduced full 3D graphics.

In Final Fantasy, if you encounter someone who has to remain alive in order for the plot to work, then you simply cannot attack that person. It doesn’t matter how annoying they are, or how many weapons you have–they are invulnerable. No explanation is given in the context of the game; they just are.

Furthermore, while the worlds of Final Fantasy appear large and open, they are full of invisible walls. If you are meant to wander through a forest, and there’s something to the north that you’re not meant to discover until your return journey, the game developers will think nothing of placing a temporary invisible wall there to prevent you taking that path too soon. So while the Final Fantasy games are almost universally acclaimed for their rich plots and character development, as well as their state-of-the-art graphics, there’s no denying that they lack realism and immersion.

Nintendo’s acclaimed 3D Legend of Zelda games are more immersive, as they mostly use clever world design rather than invisible walls to limit the player’s roaming. However, they take a surreal approach to preventing unwanted conflict: if a creature or person in the game is friendly, then you can swing your sword at them as much as you like, and it will simply pass straight through them or bounce off of them harmlessly–because that is what the plot demands.

Which brings me to Grand Theft Auto III.

The GTA revolution

Grand Theft Auto III (henceforth GTA3) was the 3D sequel to a moderately successful franchise of 2D games. The earlier games had presented the player with a top-down view of city streets, and allowed him to drive vehicles around, committing crimes and evading law enforcement. While there were tasks to perform to advance the game towards “winning”, players were given fairly free reign to decide where to go and how much mayhem to cause.

The revolutionary aspect of GTA3 was that it took this idea of player freedom even further, modeling an entire city in 3D, complete with parking lots, outdoor cafes, car showrooms, gas stations, apartment buildings, warehouses, airports, and all the other architectural features found in cities across the USA. These detailed virtual worlds were populated with hundreds of people–emergency services crews, police, shoppers, drug dealers, businessmen, construction workers, bus drivers–and, of course, criminals. An attempt was made to give the non-player characters their own personalities and agendas, and to model the physics of the world somewhat accurately. The game launched the genre known as the sandbox game, where you have no mandatory goals or tasks, and can do what pleases you rather than what will advance the plot.

Early on in GTA3, I was driving beneath the elevated railway lines in one of the seedier parts of town. As I cruised towards the Italian district of the city, I suddenly saw a piece of unexpected drama playing out on a nearby sidewalk. There was a woman, who from her dress was presumably a prostitute. She was being punched by a man who I assumed was either a john, or her pimp. I slammed on the brakes, jumped out of the car, ran over–and hit the guy with a baseball bat I was carrying. He stopped attacking the woman, who ran off, and began attacking me instead. I ended up beating him into unconsciousness. Unsure of what to do next, I looked around for the woman, but she was no longer in sight. I started walking back to my car. As I reached the car, I heard sirens. I looked around again. An ambulance was approaching. It stopped by the injured man, and two EMS workers got out. They loaded the unconscious man into the back of the ambulance, got back in, and drove off towards the nearby hospital.

I was amazed.

I am recounting this true story because if you’ve heard nothing else about GTA, you’ve probably heard that the game lets you have sex with prostitutes and then kill them. That seems to be the starting point of almost every critique of GTA I see, even today.

Yes, it’s true. GTA lets you have sex with prostitutes. It also lets you kill them afterwards. However, as I hope my own experience illustrates, it also lets you choose a totally different path. The game sets up a complicated virtual city that obeys certain somewhat realistic rules, and lets you decide how to behave.

If I had chosen to do so, I could have killed the ambulance workers. I tried that later on. That time, a passing cop saw me, and before long I was being chased by multiple police cars. Unlike many video games, violence in GTA has consequences in the game.

Alternatively, I could have stolen the ambulance while they were trying to load the guy in the back. If you steal an ambulance in that way, you can then choose to take part in emergency rescue missions where you pick up wounded people and ferry them to hospital. You can also steal a taxi cab, and try to make money ferrying people safely around the city as quickly as possible. If your driving is too dangerous, they’ll bail out as soon as they can, shouting that you’re crazy.

You don’t have to shoot people to kill them in GTA either. You can run them over, deliberately or by accident. In fact, some missions are considerably easier if you drive straight into a gang of assailants rather than attempt to attack them on foot. Other missions can be failed instantly if you accidentally plow your vehicle into someone you’re supposed to be saving.

People can also die when vehicles blow up–which they often do, either because someone has shot the gas tank several times, or because you’ve booby-trapped them with explosives, or because you’ve managed to get your hands on a rocket launcher, or because an adjacent vehicle blew up and set them on fire. Sometimes a bystander will avoid an explosion, but get hit by a piece of debris. You can drive up onto a parking lot rooftop, drive at a ramp that points out over the edge, leap out of the vehicle at the last moment and roll across the ground, then watch as the car sails off the roof,  through the air, and crashes into a crowd of pedestrians below, crushing some of them to death.

You’re not the only person causing casualties either. The police shoot at criminals, and sometimes kill them. On occasion, when in hot pursuit, a cop car will hit and kill innocent bystanders.

This kind of detail, and the associated freedom of choice, was groundbreaking when GTA was released. When the second GTA 3D game was released, titled Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, the degree of choice was increased still further.

In Vice City, you can get a job delivering pizza on a moped, hurrying to get the food there before it gets cold, then returning to the pizza restaurant for more. You can still work as a cab driver, but you can also get involved in a fight with a rival cab firm, put them out of business, take over their offices, and earn a regular income. You can buy a car sales showroom, then steal cars to order for customers. You can take part in demolition derby races at the stadium for prize money and prize cars. You can compete in illegal street races. You can use an ice cream van as a front to start a drug dealing operation.

As alluded to earlier, there are missions in GTA games, which advance the overall story in movie-like fashion towards some sort of resolution, and the end credits. However, you don’t have to attempt any of the main story missions. In fact, none of the action I’ve described so far has anything to do with the main story of any of the games; it’s all just incidental detail, part of the sandbox. Personally, though, I like story. I’ve played through the story missions of all five PS2 GTA games. So in the next part of this set of postings, I’ll talk about the media controversies around the GTA games, from the perspective of someone intimately familiar with them.

In the mean time, you might want to read the story Rage against the machines from Prospect magazine, which talks about the idea that video games in general are a brain-damaging addiction, and describes why that’s an outdated idea.

May 26

I noticed that The Edge magazine has an article in a recent issue asking if boss fights are a cliché that should be wiped out.

My vote is an enthusiastic and wholehearted yes.

Last night I got to the penultimate battle of "Prince of Persia: Rival Swords". After about half an hour of frustration and annoyance, I gave up. The rest of the game was great, but the last major battle (with the Vizier) exemplifies everything that’s lame and sucky about traditional "boss fights", with some Wii-specific obnoxiousness added to the mix.

  1. You’re in a circular arena with no cover and no option to take a strategic approach.
  2. In the second stage, the boss is immune to normal attacks. The only way to harm him is to (a) run up a wall behind him, then (b) do a special "speed kill" combo.
  3. The arena is filled with floating rotating stone rubble that, rather than simply pushing you aside, for some reason explodes and does you damage if you touch any of it.
  4. To "enhance" the Wii version, they added extra swirling sand that swirls in the way so you can’t see what you’re doing.
  5. Because of 3 and 4, the frame rate drops in half.
  6. Either the timing is arbitrarily tighter for the final battle, or the frame rate drop affects the controls. Either way, it’s substantially harder to get the special attack to be registered properly than at any previous point in the game. This is particularly true because it’s a Wii port of a game designed for conventional console controllers, so the action you have to time to within a fraction of a second is shaking the nunchuck downwards.
  7. You have to do the almost-impossible-to-time special attack several times in a row.
  8. Once you do that, you’re still not done, there’s a third stage that requires an even more ridiculous combination of jumps and leaps between floating debris, then do another speed kill.
  9. Because the Wii is 16:9 and they didn’t rework the battle sequences to fit vertically, the flashing dagger that’s the cue to jerk the controller is sometimes offscreen. This is a problem throughout the game, but it becomes particularly annoying during this fight.
  10. If you die, you have to go back to stage 1 and do the whole thing again.

Thanks to the wonders of YouTube, you can see the final battle in all its irritating stupidity.

Now, there are video game boss fights that aren’t awful. Nintendo tend to do a good job of them. I had no objection to the bosses in any of the 3D Zelda games, because each time there was a strategy that you could work out that would make them pretty easy.

The first Metroid Prime had a couple of questionable boss fights, but after that they pretty much realized what they were doing wrong, and things got progressively better over the next two games in the series.

But in general, while I tolerate good boss fights, I never find myself wishing there were more of even the best ones. Almost all boss fights are lame pieces of arena combat where your abilities are crippled and then you’re given frustrating pieces of arbitrary crap to do, that has to be exactly timed and unnecessarily repeated.

I know there are people who love that sort of thing, of course. For those people, there are games like Shadow of the Colossus. For the rest of us… an end to boss fights, please.

Feb 05

In the video game store the other day, rothko was ranting about the “girl games”. With the success of the Nintendo DS, there are dozens of the things. “Catz”, “Dogz”, “Horsez”, “Pony Friends”, “Horse Life”, half a dozen Barbie games, and “Baby Pals”, all with pink and purple cover art.

The games that induced the rant, however, were the ones in the “Imagine” series from Ubisoft. The boundaries of what a young girl is supposed to be imagining are starkly delineated by Ubisoft: “Animal Doctor”, “Fashion Designer”, “Figure Skater”, “Master Chef”… and of course, “Babyz”.

Nintendo themselves seem to understand how to produce games that appeal to women (and girls) without actually being incredibly patronizing, and without limiting the appeal only to females. “Nintendogs” was a system-seller, and managed it without pink ribbon and purple butterflies. “Animal Crossing” topped the charts, “Wario Ware” was big too. “Super Princess Peach” is dressed in pink, but the game has her fighting monsters to save poor helpless Mario.

But there’s a new brain imaging study that suggests that it may be a mistake to think that it’s possible to make video games that appeal to women as much as some games appeal to men:

After analyzing the imaging data for the entire group, the researchers found that the participants showed activation in the brain’s mesocorticolimbic center, the region typically associated with reward and addiction. Male brains, however, showed much greater activation, and the amount of activation was correlated with how much territory they gained. (This wasn’t the case with women.)

It makes a certain amount of evolutionary sense that male brains might be wired to get a bigger reward from gaining territory. However, this doesn’t account for games which don’t involve territory gain at all. I don’t think anyone was particularly hard pressed to explain why guys like FPSs and Sid Meier’s Civilization more than women do; but what about 3D platformers? Fighting games? For that matter, what about the first video game to become popular with women, Pac-man?

Feb 04

When the Xbox 360 came out, it was portrayed as something everyone wanted, the amazing new console that was selling out everywhere. Yet the next week, when I walked into Costco they had a pallet piled high with the things.

When the Wii was launched, it became the console that was really selling out everywhere. But by then, Microsoft had moved on to their new story, that the Xbox 360 was the biggest selling next-gen console.

Except that it isn’t.

If you read the small print on Microsoft’s announced sales figures, you find that they’re not actually lying; but they count a console as sold as soon as it leaves the factory. Sony and Nintendo do the same, but there’s a big difference in how that figure relates to the number of consoles actually sold to gamers.

If you walk into any electronics store, you’ll probably see several dozen Xbox 360s piled up in the main store. You won’t see anything like as many PS3s, and you probably still won’t see a Wii. Think about that. Also, think about the fact that electronics stores don’t actually like to pile expensive items up in the middle of the store inside their boxes; it usually indicates that they’ve got even more piles of the things in storage out back, and have run out of space and are trying desperately to shift them. Have you ever seen a big pile of digital cameras in their boxes in Best Buy? A stack of dozens of Denon receivers in Circuit City? Nope. But you’ve probably seen a big stack of $30 Chinese DVD players on clearance…

Someone has put these observations together with some hard sales data. It turns out that the channel is absolutely bloated with unwanted Xbox 360s. Not only that, the 360 was almost matched for sales by the PS2, except during Halo release month, which is clearly visible as a statistical anomaly. When the release of a single game skews your sales that much, that can’t be a good thing either, can it?

In fact, Xbox 360 sales peaked in 2006. And with the PS3 now having a solid library of good games, I don’t see it improving. Also interesting is the analysis of how the 360 is actually more expensive than the PS3, once you factor in the add-ons to make it equivalent in capability.

Jul 20

Microsoft’s Xbox division has announced their results for Fiscal Year 2006. Highlights:

  • Total loss of $1.2 billion.
  • Operating losses up 183%.
  • Revenues down 10% YTY in Q4 because of “decreased Xbox 360 console sales”; specifically…
  • Sales dropped from 1.8 million units per quarter to just 700,000 units per quarter, YTY.
  • Revenue from sales of games down 28%.

This is awesome news, making it six years of losses to date.

Microsoft say they expect to make a profit in the upcoming year. O RLY? They couldn’t make a profit during a year in which they basically had no competition, so how do they expect to do better now that the Wii is outselling their console by a factor of 3:1 or more and Wii games are already outselling Xbox games? Nintendo makes a profit on every Wii console, while Microsoft has apparently lost money on every Xbox 360 they’ve sold, even after you factor out the huge losses from replacing broken consoles under warranty.

Added to that, the PS3 is going to see its first “must have” games ship towards the end of this year. Grand Theft Auto IV looks incredible, but the Xbox 360 version is apparently in trouble because it’s hard to cram the game onto a DVD. Demos to date have been the Xbox version, but there’s a good chance the PS3 version is going to end up looking significantly better. Then there’s Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction, Heavenly Sword, the new Indiana Jones game, Killzone 2 (with its 2GB levels), LittleBigPlanet, Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune, and so on.

Basically, Microsoft have already been squeezed out of the low end of the market by the Wii, and the hardcore gamers are likely to start getting more interested in the PS3 soon. I suspect Microsoft has much less chance of turning a profit next year than it did this last year.

Mar 20

The Wii arrived today. So far we’ve played bowling and tennis. It really is as much fun as I’d hoped; we ended up laughing and bouncing around and breaking a mild sweat. Perhaps later in the week we’ll try Rayman Raving Rabbids and smack some bunnies with rubber plungers.

The whole Wii experience is very slick, from the packaging the console comes in to the user interface of the software itself. Nintendo are the Apple of video games.

Mar 15

Perhaps the kidney stone in the urethra of Nintendo’s supply chain is finally passing, because Wii is now starting to appear in stores. Controllers are readily available, and I managed to put in an order on Toys”R”Us’s web site during one of the 6 minute periods when the console was in stock. So, hopefully in a week or two we’ll be Wii-ing.

Ironically, I finally saw screen shots of a couple of PS3 games that interest me: Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction and LittleBigPlanet. And if Fatal Inertia ends up being disappointing, Sony are working on a real Wipeout for PS3. So I’m fairly optimistic that there will be a good reason to buy a PS3 some time before Christmas.

But right now, I’m much more interested in Zelda, Super Paper Mario, WarioWare, Elebits, Kororinpa, and Prince of Persia: Rival Swords (since I skipped Two Thrones). I also plan to visit some of the GameCube’s back catalog; the cube has been sitting idle since I failed to get component video to work, but the Wii should solve that problem.

Mar 11

Today I got to try a demo of Jam Sessions, a new game for the Nintendo DS from Ubisoft. It’s due out in a month or two.

It’s basically a guitar synth. The buttons are used to “finger” different chords, then you pluck a virtual string displayed on the touch screen. You can use a real guitar pick, even.

The sound quality was pretty good. I have Electroplankton, and the sampled sound on that is pretty ropey. This I can imagine being used by geeky techno bands on stage. The keys are all reassignable, and the shoulder button works as a shift, so theoretically at least you should be able to play anything that needs less than 8 chords, which should cover a lot of rock music. You’re not going to be the next Robert Fripp, though.

You can also record your playing, presumably via some sort of onboard sequencer, though I didn’t get to try that. There’s a “karaoke mode”, which I expect was more than a little inspired by Guitar Hero.

Feb 13

I bought a Nokia N800. It’s an Internet tablet, about the size of a large PDA or a small thin paperback book; almost exactly the same size as a Nintendo DS Lite, in fact. It runs Linux. It connects via WiFi or Bluetooth.

I bought it because I spend a lot of time reading web pages, PDFs and other electronic documents. In particular, my “killer app” was to be able to read the electronic edition of The Guardian with my morning coffee—ideally, in bed.

Yes, there are laptops. However, if you’ve ever tried to casually read the newspaper in bed using a laptop, you’ll probably agree with me that a kilo or so of hardware gets tiring on the arms, and trackpads aren’t conveniently located for use when the computer is propped up.

The N800 is the first portable device I’ve used that has a decent web browser. It’s Opera, in fact. The Guardian’s web site works on it. So do Google Mail, Flickr, Slashdot, Google Maps, and Wikipedia. While the text starts off small in order to squeeze a whole web page on the screen, it’s crisp and readable, and buttons on the top of the device make it easy to zoom in and out. For web browsing it easily beats a Palm handheld, Sony Ericsson P9xx Smartphone, Windows Mobile device, or Blackberry. (I’ve tried ‘em all.)

Note that the N800 is’s not a phone. The assumption is that you already have a mobile phone with Bluetooth; if you want to use expensive mobile data plans, you just pair your phone with the N800. This is an assumption I agree with; in general I want my mobile phone to be small enough to fit in the pocket of a pair of jeans, which precludes giving it a screen big enough to browse the web on.

Here are some other high points:

  • XMPP/Jabber chat client.
  • Google talk for voice and video chat.
  • Streaming MP3 support.
  • It’s Linux. If Nokia lose interest, you won’t be totally stuck; the community can continue to fix bugs and improve the OS.
  • Want to run Nethack, SCUMMVM, or SSH into it and explore via the shell? You can.
  • Assuming you switch it off entirely, it still only takes 10 seconds to boot. Mostly, though, you’ll just let it sleep, in which case waking up is instant.
  • Flash works, mostly. It’s not the latest version, however. (Threadless seems to work, bleep.com doesn’t.)

And in the interest of balance, the low points:

  • The built in camera is terrible. It makes the camera in my cell phone look good. Forget about using it for anything except video chat.
  • PDA basics like address book and calendar are totally absent. I guess the assumption is that you use online services for such things. However, this does mean the device’s usefulness is totally crippled without an active network connection.
  • The Maemo platform is currently in the early stages of its life. This means that OS updates often break existing applications, and the selection of applications isn’t great to start with.
  • The handwriting recognition is horrible, at least compared to Palm OS or the Apple Newton.
  • No Java. WTF? Even my mobile phone has Java. Maybe this will change once Sun finishes making Java available under the GPL.

So the executive summary is: if you want something you can keep in your satchel and use to browse the web at the café, this is currently your best bet. If you like the idea of the iPhone but don’t fancy paying about $2k and being locked out of running your choice of applications, the N800 plus a tiny GSM phone in your pocket is a good alternative, and has more than double the pixels.

(And yes, LiveJournal works on it. If you must.)