For many gamers, like myself, Xbox Live's Avatar Awards are still mythical. I have yet to play a game with Awards, because few games offer them. Perhaps that's because Awards are, at the moment, nothing more than visual Achievements. That's not bad, really, but there could be more depth.
Many people care about XBL Achievements and many don't. That's largely because it's an all-or-nothing scenario in favor of those with lots of spending money (to buy games with) and a long time owning the console. If someone has owned a 360 for a year longer than you, they probably have a higher Gamerscore.
Achievements are also impersonal. If you and I play the same game, we'll typically get the same Achievements for doing the same things.
But what if Avatar Awards were different? What if gamers could compete for them?
What if my friend JoeSchmoe64 and I could voluntarily wager that one of us will get a particular Award before the other? The winner gets the Award, while the same Award is blocked for the loser. The winner could be given the power to unlock the loser's Award for him afterward, or they could agree to permanently leave one with the trophy and the other empty-handed.
If the game included multiple Awards, then Joe might win two trophies while I win two others... and we'd each have something to show.
Keep in mind, Avatar Awards needn't all be complicated models or animations, like a train moving around an avatar's feet. They could be as simple as blocks stacked beside an avatar or a banner draped behind, each signifying a specific achievement.
Honestly, I haven't put much thought into this idea. But the basic idea is that Awards could be made more meaningful than Achievements by allowing players to bet them as stakes or otherwise making them reflect actions that set one gamer apart from others.
Showing posts with label xbox live. Show all posts
Showing posts with label xbox live. Show all posts
Friday, December 04, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Xbox Live '09 update
I've been able to preview the XBL update for a week or two now. Here are my impressions.
Netflix has been significantly improved, particularly in regard to speed. The stream buffers and correct itself much faster than before. In fact, corrections (adjustments when connection speed slows) usually take no more than one second. You can now see a list of shows you've recently viewed, which makes it easy to jump back into a TV series you were watching or resume a movie you were forced to stop. You can also add shows to your queue from lists of new arrivals and genres, including some tailored to your viewing habits. Oh, and you can now allow or disallow your friends to see what you're watching, so they can choose to join you in viewing. Overall, I'm very pleased with the Netflix update.
The other big change is the addition of Games on Demand. IGN has a nice breakdown of which deals are good and which are not so good. Why anyone would pay $30 for Call of Duty 2, a great game but a largely outdated one that can be found much cheaper elsewhere, is beyond me. On the other hand, Mass Effect for $20 bucks is great. You can pay straight by credit card or by Microsoft Points. It has taken me about an hour-and-a-half to download 52% of the 6.83 Gigs Mass Effect file with a cable connection.
You can now rate games using a 5-star rating system in the Game Marketplace. This applies to both triple-A titles and small indie games. A very welcome addition.
The Avatar Marketplace has potential, but is hard for me to get excited about so far. There are some cool items available, but I dislike the idea of paying for any of it when similar works would be free on a PC service. That said... *sigh* I've already purchased a hat -- an Irish tam similar to the one I wear in real life, which makes my avatar look very much like me. Cool items range from pirate hats and a Big Daddy helmet to a guitar and lightsaber.
If I were you, I'd hold out until Avatar Awards goes live. There's already a place for Awards in the menu below Achievements. Presumably, that will entail similar goodies awarded for free while playing games. Why buy that guitar now when I'll likely be able to get one free later for playing Rock Band 2 or Brutal Legend? As long as Awards are indeed free, and not just unlocked Marketplace items, I'll be happy.
Game save files in your HDD memory are now time-stamped, making them easier to manage.
Those are what I consider to be the main changes. There are some other things -- like the number on your Profile which may or may not accurately reflect the number of years you've been an XBL Gold subsriber (mine is incorrect). Here's Microsoft's press release for the update.
Facebook, Twitter, Last.fm and Zune Video are coming later in the year. I'm looking forward to the Last.fm radio service.
What are your impressions of the update?
Netflix has been significantly improved, particularly in regard to speed. The stream buffers and correct itself much faster than before. In fact, corrections (adjustments when connection speed slows) usually take no more than one second. You can now see a list of shows you've recently viewed, which makes it easy to jump back into a TV series you were watching or resume a movie you were forced to stop. You can also add shows to your queue from lists of new arrivals and genres, including some tailored to your viewing habits. Oh, and you can now allow or disallow your friends to see what you're watching, so they can choose to join you in viewing. Overall, I'm very pleased with the Netflix update.
The other big change is the addition of Games on Demand. IGN has a nice breakdown of which deals are good and which are not so good. Why anyone would pay $30 for Call of Duty 2, a great game but a largely outdated one that can be found much cheaper elsewhere, is beyond me. On the other hand, Mass Effect for $20 bucks is great. You can pay straight by credit card or by Microsoft Points. It has taken me about an hour-and-a-half to download 52% of the 6.83 Gigs Mass Effect file with a cable connection.
You can now rate games using a 5-star rating system in the Game Marketplace. This applies to both triple-A titles and small indie games. A very welcome addition.
The Avatar Marketplace has potential, but is hard for me to get excited about so far. There are some cool items available, but I dislike the idea of paying for any of it when similar works would be free on a PC service. That said... *sigh* I've already purchased a hat -- an Irish tam similar to the one I wear in real life, which makes my avatar look very much like me. Cool items range from pirate hats and a Big Daddy helmet to a guitar and lightsaber.
If I were you, I'd hold out until Avatar Awards goes live. There's already a place for Awards in the menu below Achievements. Presumably, that will entail similar goodies awarded for free while playing games. Why buy that guitar now when I'll likely be able to get one free later for playing Rock Band 2 or Brutal Legend? As long as Awards are indeed free, and not just unlocked Marketplace items, I'll be happy.
Game save files in your HDD memory are now time-stamped, making them easier to manage.
Those are what I consider to be the main changes. There are some other things -- like the number on your Profile which may or may not accurately reflect the number of years you've been an XBL Gold subsriber (mine is incorrect). Here's Microsoft's press release for the update.
Facebook, Twitter, Last.fm and Zune Video are coming later in the year. I'm looking forward to the Last.fm radio service.
What are your impressions of the update?
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Netflix games
It seems likely to me that Netflix could efficiently rent out games via download on Xbox Live.
Whether or not they could stream games, ala OnLive, is debatable. But they could allow XBL users to temporarily download games as Microsoft does with movie rentals. Big downloads, for sure, but the Xbox 360 does allow things to be downloaded in the background or while the console is only partially powered up. And at least some games could be played once a portion of the game is downloaded, allowing gamers to play while downloading the rest, ala Microsoft's movie service.
I would pay an extra 10 bucks per month for that. Would you?
Whether or not they could stream games, ala OnLive, is debatable. But they could allow XBL users to temporarily download games as Microsoft does with movie rentals. Big downloads, for sure, but the Xbox 360 does allow things to be downloaded in the background or while the console is only partially powered up. And at least some games could be played once a portion of the game is downloaded, allowing gamers to play while downloading the rest, ala Microsoft's movie service.
I would pay an extra 10 bucks per month for that. Would you?
Thursday, April 16, 2009
XBL Achievements as credits
I whole-heartedly agree with Whipple that that Xbox Live Achievement are underdeveloped and should have some tangible use.
Whipple proposes the gamers could spend their Gamerscore points on downloadable content (possibly content designed specifically for Gamerscore purchases). That's a good idea, as long as one's public score continues to represent all of the player's Achievements while the spendable points from those Achievements is presented elsewhere.
Another possibility is for Gamescore to unlock privileges. The higher the score, the more privileges. This rewards people for playing games.
Whipple proposes the gamers could spend their Gamerscore points on downloadable content (possibly content designed specifically for Gamerscore purchases). That's a good idea, as long as one's public score continues to represent all of the player's Achievements while the spendable points from those Achievements is presented elsewhere.
Another possibility is for Gamescore to unlock privileges. The higher the score, the more privileges. This rewards people for playing games.
Monday, March 02, 2009
unstable XBL hosts
I played a lot of Call of Duty 4 on my 360 over the weekend. One thing that has always bugged me about that game is how often matches are cut short when the host leaves/ends the game, presumably because of an interrupted connection most of the time.
That such interruptions occur from time to time is understandable. What isn't understandable is how it can happen repeatedly to the same host.
I'm no techie, so perhaps I'm missing something. But it seems this could be fixed if hosting was automatically switched to another player's console whenever the current host repeatedly suffers connection problems or continues to manually end games (not counting private matches, of course). Is this not possible? not feasible?
That such interruptions occur from time to time is understandable. What isn't understandable is how it can happen repeatedly to the same host.
I'm no techie, so perhaps I'm missing something. But it seems this could be fixed if hosting was automatically switched to another player's console whenever the current host repeatedly suffers connection problems or continues to manually end games (not counting private matches, of course). Is this not possible? not feasible?
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
pay-to-play events
It seems strange to me that DLC always takes the form of permanent content... always as objects, rather than events.
In the case of MMOs, it would be hard to charge for events after so many years of including that service in the subscription package. But I'm surprised games like Call of Duty 4 and Rock Band 2 don't have pay-to-play events.
It could take any number of forms. Tournaments could offer real prizes, which were bought with entry money. Music games could offer songs as temporary downloads (surely, record labels would make more songs available then). This stuff could be offered for pennies.
In the case of MMOs, it would be hard to charge for events after so many years of including that service in the subscription package. But I'm surprised games like Call of Duty 4 and Rock Band 2 don't have pay-to-play events.
It could take any number of forms. Tournaments could offer real prizes, which were bought with entry money. Music games could offer songs as temporary downloads (surely, record labels would make more songs available then). This stuff could be offered for pennies.
Monday, February 23, 2009
offline play isn't going anywhere
Apparently, almost half of the gamers with an account on Xbox Live don't pay for a Gold membership (which would give them access to online multiplayer). This makes me even more certain that online play and multiplayer are not, as they are sometimes touted to be, the future of gaming. They are merely options, with offline play and single-player games remaining very popular.
We can assume that many 360 gamers want to play online but either will not / cannot pay for it or they don't have enough free time to justify the expense. However, we can also assume that many gamers pay for a Gold account but don't regularly use it for online play (I'm an example). I expect those and other factors make the Gold/Silver accounts balance a less-than-perfect indicator of interest in single-player gameplay vs multiplayer, but it might be roughly accurate in that regard.
More importantly, though, we can look at the sales figures for single-player games. Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Super Mario Galaxy, Wii Play, Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Metal Gear Solid 4 are all bestselling games that thrive on offline, single-player experiences. Other hits like The Sims, Spore, and Little Big Planet are essentially offline, single-player experiences in which online components work backstage. Single-player games are still very profitable and still among the most popular games around.
And yet, how much money is there to be had from downloadable content? That potential will skew the market toward online gameplay. Single-player games will always have a large share of the market, but I expect we'll see more and more games using the model of Oblivion and GTA IV: single-player, but with DLC that does not always appear simultaneously as hard copies.
We can assume that many 360 gamers want to play online but either will not / cannot pay for it or they don't have enough free time to justify the expense. However, we can also assume that many gamers pay for a Gold account but don't regularly use it for online play (I'm an example). I expect those and other factors make the Gold/Silver accounts balance a less-than-perfect indicator of interest in single-player gameplay vs multiplayer, but it might be roughly accurate in that regard.
More importantly, though, we can look at the sales figures for single-player games. Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Super Mario Galaxy, Wii Play, Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Metal Gear Solid 4 are all bestselling games that thrive on offline, single-player experiences. Other hits like The Sims, Spore, and Little Big Planet are essentially offline, single-player experiences in which online components work backstage. Single-player games are still very profitable and still among the most popular games around.
And yet, how much money is there to be had from downloadable content? That potential will skew the market toward online gameplay. Single-player games will always have a large share of the market, but I expect we'll see more and more games using the model of Oblivion and GTA IV: single-player, but with DLC that does not always appear simultaneously as hard copies.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
preview XBL premium themes
Why doesn't Microsoft let you preview premium themes for you 360 dashboard, either on XBL or on the web? Idiocy, plain and simple.
There's simply no excuse, and the strangest part is that more people would buy premium themes if they could see what they were getting. Everyone expects to be able to preview, and Microsoft would make more money if they offered previews, yet they don't. So, like I said, idiocy.
Anyway, after 10-15 minutes of failed searching on Google and the Xbox Live Marketplace, I finally ran across a thread on the Xbox.com forums in which someone (not a Microsoft rep, of course) pointed out this site that lets you preview the premium themes. A huge thank you to whoever created the site.
I'm still using the freeChristmas *cough* Holiday theme for now, but the premium themes I like the most are Tomb Raider: Underworld [1] and Halo Wars. The Forza 2 theme is awesome for racing fans.
There's simply no excuse, and the strangest part is that more people would buy premium themes if they could see what they were getting. Everyone expects to be able to preview, and Microsoft would make more money if they offered previews, yet they don't. So, like I said, idiocy.
Anyway, after 10-15 minutes of failed searching on Google and the Xbox Live Marketplace, I finally ran across a thread on the Xbox.com forums in which someone (not a Microsoft rep, of course) pointed out this site that lets you preview the premium themes. A huge thank you to whoever created the site.
I'm still using the free
Monday, January 12, 2009
Netflix update
I rejoined Netflix late last week, and their partnership with Microsoft is definitely a much better deal than I expected.
As I said before, my trial of Netflix last August left me with low expectations for the online service that would reach Xbox Live. Little of the streamable content was worthwhile, most of it being decades-old B movies or worse. Since then, Netflix has signed a deal with Starz, which adds plenty of films that are actually good and well-produced: Goodfellas, No Country for Old Men, Enchanted, etc.
They also seem to have made more TV series available for streaming. Some, like NewsRadio (Phil Hartman is hilarious!) and The A-Team, are available on Hulu for free. But now Netflix also has many seasons of Law & Order, CSI, Dead Like Me, and other popular shows.
I watched many movies and TV episodes over the weekend and had no problems with stream quality. Keep in mind, though, that I have an old CRT television and cable-quality internet. If you have an HD-TV or slow/choppy connection, I suppose your stream quality could be worse. Regardless of how often the current streaming strategy works, it seems nonsensical that users are not allowed to forego live streaming and instead choose heavy buffering for better resolution.
It's also disappointing that so many triple-A films which can be purchased for download elsewhere (i.e., are already available in a disc-less format) are not available for streaming, but I can only assume that's due to the film publishers.
But the benefits outweigh the shortcomings. I now have over a hundred films and TV shows in my queu. All of them are on-demand content with DVD-like controls and no commercial interruptions. As long as I'm a member of Netflix, I can take all of that content with me when I travel. It's a sweet deal.
As I said before, my trial of Netflix last August left me with low expectations for the online service that would reach Xbox Live. Little of the streamable content was worthwhile, most of it being decades-old B movies or worse. Since then, Netflix has signed a deal with Starz, which adds plenty of films that are actually good and well-produced: Goodfellas, No Country for Old Men, Enchanted, etc.
They also seem to have made more TV series available for streaming. Some, like NewsRadio (Phil Hartman is hilarious!) and The A-Team, are available on Hulu for free. But now Netflix also has many seasons of Law & Order, CSI, Dead Like Me, and other popular shows.
I watched many movies and TV episodes over the weekend and had no problems with stream quality. Keep in mind, though, that I have an old CRT television and cable-quality internet. If you have an HD-TV or slow/choppy connection, I suppose your stream quality could be worse. Regardless of how often the current streaming strategy works, it seems nonsensical that users are not allowed to forego live streaming and instead choose heavy buffering for better resolution.
It's also disappointing that so many triple-A films which can be purchased for download elsewhere (i.e., are already available in a disc-less format) are not available for streaming, but I can only assume that's due to the film publishers.
But the benefits outweigh the shortcomings. I now have over a hundred films and TV shows in my queu. All of them are on-demand content with DVD-like controls and no commercial interruptions. As long as I'm a member of Netflix, I can take all of that content with me when I travel. It's a sweet deal.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Achievements and trophies
As I said over at Osbon's, the Achievements I enjoy most are the ones that reward lucky, odd, and crazy things. Crackdown has an Achievement for using the harpoon gun to pin three or four people to the same car. It also has an Achievement for leaping from the top of the tallest skyscraper and falling (harmlessly) into the bay below. Those aren't just accomplishments. Those are memorable moments. Trophies and Achievements can help preserve such fond memories.
Completing a level or chapter is often not a memorable moment. Every adventure game I play has Achievements for completing each level, but I don't remember many of those times. Still, having Achievements for the completion of levels is good, because it helps friends keep track of how far you are in a game and inspires friendly conversation.
There are ordinary moments like these that are worth commemorating (rewarding effort can be done in better ways). But, overall, Achievements should celebrate extraordinary moments. Those are the moments worth remembering. Those are the moments that gamers are most inclined to share, thereby promoting the game and aiding its longevity, among many other benefits.
Completing a level or chapter is often not a memorable moment. Every adventure game I play has Achievements for completing each level, but I don't remember many of those times. Still, having Achievements for the completion of levels is good, because it helps friends keep track of how far you are in a game and inspires friendly conversation.
There are ordinary moments like these that are worth commemorating (rewarding effort can be done in better ways). But, overall, Achievements should celebrate extraordinary moments. Those are the moments worth remembering. Those are the moments that gamers are most inclined to share, thereby promoting the game and aiding its longevity, among many other benefits.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
better matchmaking
So apparently Blogger posts a blog if I accidentally hit Enter after typing the title. Sorry about the blank RSS feed.
Anyway, some recent experiences in Left 4 Dead have convinced me that Xbox Live, and other multiplayer services, could use better matchmaking.
The first experience was trying to add someone as a friend and being told she's reached her friend limit. That made me think... it's a shame that I can't be more likely to play with someone without putting them on my friends list.
The second experience is having run into a lot of exploiters and jerks this past week. There's a Left 4 Dead exploit that involves blocking an elevator exit, so the survivors are trapped -- the game effectively comes to a halt. One of my teammates did it and told me he thought it's hilarious, even though he admits he hates it happening to him. Other strangers I've played with have abandoned their teammates to rush ahead, or constantly complained about greener players not playing up to their standards, or focused on particular strategies so exclusively that fun falls by the wayside.
Some of these behaviors really just mean a person with a particular playstyle shouldn't be matched with players who have very different values, strategies, and levels of experience. It's like the classic RTS playstyles: zerg, balanced, and turtle. Each player generally prefer play as and against one or another style.
What I'd like to see is a system that allows each player to privately rank others according to preference, affecting only the odds of those people coming up in game searches.
Such a system better takes into account that two players might not play well together yet neither of them is doing anything wrong; like an explorer and an achiever playing the same game with vastly different goals and interests. It doesn't separate players entirely, but the odds keep them apart enough to prevent frustration and boredom. This also encourages gamers to play with their friends, but not only with their friends... creating the possibility of making new friends and being challenged in new ways.
It also helps for each game to list classifications related to that game in particular. For example, RTS players would love it if they could choose when to play against zerg tactics and when to play against turtles. Every player will want play a game in different ways depending on mood, recent experiences, and other factors.
How else could game matchmaking be improved?
Anyway, some recent experiences in Left 4 Dead have convinced me that Xbox Live, and other multiplayer services, could use better matchmaking.
The first experience was trying to add someone as a friend and being told she's reached her friend limit. That made me think... it's a shame that I can't be more likely to play with someone without putting them on my friends list.
The second experience is having run into a lot of exploiters and jerks this past week. There's a Left 4 Dead exploit that involves blocking an elevator exit, so the survivors are trapped -- the game effectively comes to a halt. One of my teammates did it and told me he thought it's hilarious, even though he admits he hates it happening to him. Other strangers I've played with have abandoned their teammates to rush ahead, or constantly complained about greener players not playing up to their standards, or focused on particular strategies so exclusively that fun falls by the wayside.
Some of these behaviors really just mean a person with a particular playstyle shouldn't be matched with players who have very different values, strategies, and levels of experience. It's like the classic RTS playstyles: zerg, balanced, and turtle. Each player generally prefer play as and against one or another style.
What I'd like to see is a system that allows each player to privately rank others according to preference, affecting only the odds of those people coming up in game searches.
Such a system better takes into account that two players might not play well together yet neither of them is doing anything wrong; like an explorer and an achiever playing the same game with vastly different goals and interests. It doesn't separate players entirely, but the odds keep them apart enough to prevent frustration and boredom. This also encourages gamers to play with their friends, but not only with their friends... creating the possibility of making new friends and being challenged in new ways.
It also helps for each game to list classifications related to that game in particular. For example, RTS players would love it if they could choose when to play against zerg tactics and when to play against turtles. Every player will want play a game in different ways depending on mood, recent experiences, and other factors.
How else could game matchmaking be improved?
Monday, December 22, 2008
Hulu and YouTube
You might have already read by now that Microsoft is at least considering integration of web services like Hulu and YouTube into Xbox Live. I see this as a big deal.
HULU
First, Hulu has a different business model than Netflix. Users can view content (TV and films) at no charge, the shows being paid for by advertisements. It includes a number of triple-A and top-notch TV shows (like NewsRadio), and browsing them is simpler than with Netflix. Hulu even has an integrated tool for selecting clips and emailing them to friends. I love Hulu. I much prefer its quick and easy TV-on-demand service with relatively few commercials in lieu of a traditional cable or satellite subscription.
The first complication I see is that Xbox Live currently charges users to rent content which can be viewed for free (through advertisements) on Hulu, such as Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog. My gut says Microsoft would screw us and not allow Hulu to show anything we're charged for now, but it's possible Microsoft would take the high road and allow us the paid-by-ads alternative.
Microsoft would almost certainly place its own ads in Hulu's content. That strikes me as the absolute best marketing tool the company would have for reaching XBL users. I bet most users are more likely to watch a good TV show or movie with game advertisements in them than to download trailers and video interviews for every game they might enjoy. Ads in Hulu via the 360 would reach more Xbox users than ads anywhere else.
And contracting with Hulu would be a major selling point. Yes, it's available online, but most people would rather watch free, on-demand shows on their television than on their computer. TVs can be hooked up to PCs, but that's not a mainstream practice (it's common among tech junkies only, who are not that big a chunk of society as a whole).
Hulu would benefit greatly by attracting more advertisers with the 360 user community. Their services would consequently expand and become more attractive to users and marketers. More film studios who currently contract with TV broadcasters might see Hulu as a viable partner. Because Hulu would finally be playing on the televisions of millions, rather than on computers, the company could finally become a direct competitor to subscription television.
Of course, if Hulu was ever big enough to compete directly with them, the Hulu business model would probably change; either they'd gradually increase ad interruptions, as TV broadcasters have over the years, or they'd start charging a subscription of their own. But we can hope their present model would stand for a while.
YouTube
Videos of Halo and other games already cover YouTube. More gamers would watch those sort of videos if it could be done while already focused on games (engaged on their gaming console). YouTube integration would greatly facilitate game tutorials and walkthroughs. It might even make gaming tournaments more viable.
YouTube integration could significantly affect the design of many games. Community and Arcade games would use YouTube most frequently, but I'm talking mainly about the design of triple-AAA titles. And I don't mean like Spore either, which enables players to share their creature creations. No, I'm talking about dynamics. What makes games like Halo and MMOs so popular on YouTube is their room for fresh, personal experiences. It's the ability to still see new and exciting stories months or even years after the game is released. It's the revelation of personal preferences and personal adventures -- stories which are individually representative.
YouTube play-session stories are excellent marketing. Ads are more effective when they're recommended by friends. Videos of unique and exciting experiences encourage lengthy conversations between friends -- conversations which embed the ads to memory, inform, and stoke anticipation. YouTube integration could greatly increase impulse purchases of downloadable content.
Anyway, long story short, I hope Microsoft can work out satisfactory contracts with both YouTube and Hulu. Those deals could be as sweet for gamers as for Microsoft and advertisers.
HULU
First, Hulu has a different business model than Netflix. Users can view content (TV and films) at no charge, the shows being paid for by advertisements. It includes a number of triple-A and top-notch TV shows (like NewsRadio), and browsing them is simpler than with Netflix. Hulu even has an integrated tool for selecting clips and emailing them to friends. I love Hulu. I much prefer its quick and easy TV-on-demand service with relatively few commercials in lieu of a traditional cable or satellite subscription.
The first complication I see is that Xbox Live currently charges users to rent content which can be viewed for free (through advertisements) on Hulu, such as Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog. My gut says Microsoft would screw us and not allow Hulu to show anything we're charged for now, but it's possible Microsoft would take the high road and allow us the paid-by-ads alternative.
Microsoft would almost certainly place its own ads in Hulu's content. That strikes me as the absolute best marketing tool the company would have for reaching XBL users. I bet most users are more likely to watch a good TV show or movie with game advertisements in them than to download trailers and video interviews for every game they might enjoy. Ads in Hulu via the 360 would reach more Xbox users than ads anywhere else.
And contracting with Hulu would be a major selling point. Yes, it's available online, but most people would rather watch free, on-demand shows on their television than on their computer. TVs can be hooked up to PCs, but that's not a mainstream practice (it's common among tech junkies only, who are not that big a chunk of society as a whole).
Hulu would benefit greatly by attracting more advertisers with the 360 user community. Their services would consequently expand and become more attractive to users and marketers. More film studios who currently contract with TV broadcasters might see Hulu as a viable partner. Because Hulu would finally be playing on the televisions of millions, rather than on computers, the company could finally become a direct competitor to subscription television.
Of course, if Hulu was ever big enough to compete directly with them, the Hulu business model would probably change; either they'd gradually increase ad interruptions, as TV broadcasters have over the years, or they'd start charging a subscription of their own. But we can hope their present model would stand for a while.
YouTube
Videos of Halo and other games already cover YouTube. More gamers would watch those sort of videos if it could be done while already focused on games (engaged on their gaming console). YouTube integration would greatly facilitate game tutorials and walkthroughs. It might even make gaming tournaments more viable.
YouTube integration could significantly affect the design of many games. Community and Arcade games would use YouTube most frequently, but I'm talking mainly about the design of triple-AAA titles. And I don't mean like Spore either, which enables players to share their creature creations. No, I'm talking about dynamics. What makes games like Halo and MMOs so popular on YouTube is their room for fresh, personal experiences. It's the ability to still see new and exciting stories months or even years after the game is released. It's the revelation of personal preferences and personal adventures -- stories which are individually representative.
YouTube play-session stories are excellent marketing. Ads are more effective when they're recommended by friends. Videos of unique and exciting experiences encourage lengthy conversations between friends -- conversations which embed the ads to memory, inform, and stoke anticipation. YouTube integration could greatly increase impulse purchases of downloadable content.
Anyway, long story short, I hope Microsoft can work out satisfactory contracts with both YouTube and Hulu. Those deals could be as sweet for gamers as for Microsoft and advertisers.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Xbox Live: blatant mistakes
Let me preface this post by saying that Xbox Live is essentially an awesome service.
Is $15 per month greedy or perfectly reasonable? I have no idea. But I do know that being able to download demos and trailers of console games quickly and easily is phenomenal, the Arcade rocks (I have 12 XBLA games now), as does the ability to rent HD movies and TV shows digitally, and I don't mind paying something per month for what is generally a smooth and well-organized multiplayer experience (which includes online co-op for many games -- something not available to console gamers before). I have a lot of respect for Microsoft's game division and its online service.
That said, here are some mistakes that are blatantly obvious and inexcusable after being ignored for so long. I mentioned some of these problems on their official forums over a year ago. I know that some things aren't simple to fix when they seem so, but Microsoft has had so very long to notice these problems and address them.
Volume chaos
There's no universal volume level. Some trailers are louder than others; some games are louder than others. Why must I have to adjust my TV's volume between media so often?
A fundamental step in audio mastering is "normalization" -- increasing a song/track's basic volume to the maximum pre-distortion level, so that it plays at the same volume as everyone else's media and doesn't make listeners worry that the next thing they play might blast out their eardrums. This should be happening with everything on Xbox Live... either at the developers' end or at the host's (Microsoft's) end. Either way, it's Microsoft's responsibility to see that it happens.
No adjusting the queu
There's no user ability to adjust the order in which queued files will be downloaded. So if I'm already downloading a couple demos when I spot a trailer I'd like to watch, then I can't prioritize the trailer without cancelling the demos (and finding them again to download, hoping I won't see anything else I want to view or play before them).
Blockbuster Online, Fileplanet, Gamefly, and every other queu program I can think of includes a capacity for reorganizing downloads. Why not Xbox Live?
No 3-way private chat?
While playing Call of Duty 4, as many as 18 people are automatically included in the game's chat channel. So there's obviously no bandwidth barrier to allowing more than two people to speak in one channel. Yet only one person can be invited to a private chat channel. If I try to invite a second person, the first channel is closed and a new one is opened. Why?
Auto-logging the wrong profile
When I boot up my 360, I have it set to take me to the dashboard. It doesn't automatically log into my user profile, but instead waits for me to log in manually. And I don't mind that. What I do mind is that it automatically logs into the second/guest profile whenever I create one (when someone needs a profile to play with me offline, for example).
Let me repeat: it automatically logs into the guest profile, making me exit that profile before I can log into my own/main profile, but it doesn't automatically log into my main profile. Needless to say, this encourages me to delete my guest profile whenever one's not needed, so I have to recreate one whenever it is needed again.
A minor annoyance becomes a major annoyance when frequent.
Misleading advertisements
Before I bought NCAA Football '08, I checked Microsoft's official Xbox site to find out if it had co-op. Sure enough, the site listed co-op gameplay. What it failed to mention was that co-op in that football game, like so many games for the 360, is online only.
That's no minor qualification... I was more than a little disappointed when I got home with the game and learned that my family couldn't play with me, only against me. It effectively meant there is no co-op in that game for me, because the people who want to play with me don't own their own 360s, I don't know enough people with 360s to play a game with more than one other person at a time (two players online must play against one another), and -- like many gamers -- I don't find playing with strangers as fun as playing with friends and family. Catan is another game that surprised me by not having local multiplayer; only online multiplayer.
Co-op/multiplayer is "online only" or "requires 3-4 players" -- such a brief yet important description that fails to make it into so many of Microsoft's game summaries on the boxes and on their site. This is very basic information that shouldn't have to be found by scouring reviews somewhere. If it's not lying, then it's damn close.
Did I miss anything? Does anyone know a secret to opening 3-way private chat channels on Xbox Live?
Is $15 per month greedy or perfectly reasonable? I have no idea. But I do know that being able to download demos and trailers of console games quickly and easily is phenomenal, the Arcade rocks (I have 12 XBLA games now), as does the ability to rent HD movies and TV shows digitally, and I don't mind paying something per month for what is generally a smooth and well-organized multiplayer experience (which includes online co-op for many games -- something not available to console gamers before). I have a lot of respect for Microsoft's game division and its online service.
That said, here are some mistakes that are blatantly obvious and inexcusable after being ignored for so long. I mentioned some of these problems on their official forums over a year ago. I know that some things aren't simple to fix when they seem so, but Microsoft has had so very long to notice these problems and address them.
Volume chaos
There's no universal volume level. Some trailers are louder than others; some games are louder than others. Why must I have to adjust my TV's volume between media so often?
A fundamental step in audio mastering is "normalization" -- increasing a song/track's basic volume to the maximum pre-distortion level, so that it plays at the same volume as everyone else's media and doesn't make listeners worry that the next thing they play might blast out their eardrums. This should be happening with everything on Xbox Live... either at the developers' end or at the host's (Microsoft's) end. Either way, it's Microsoft's responsibility to see that it happens.
No adjusting the queu
There's no user ability to adjust the order in which queued files will be downloaded. So if I'm already downloading a couple demos when I spot a trailer I'd like to watch, then I can't prioritize the trailer without cancelling the demos (and finding them again to download, hoping I won't see anything else I want to view or play before them).
Blockbuster Online, Fileplanet, Gamefly, and every other queu program I can think of includes a capacity for reorganizing downloads. Why not Xbox Live?
No 3-way private chat?
While playing Call of Duty 4, as many as 18 people are automatically included in the game's chat channel. So there's obviously no bandwidth barrier to allowing more than two people to speak in one channel. Yet only one person can be invited to a private chat channel. If I try to invite a second person, the first channel is closed and a new one is opened. Why?
Auto-logging the wrong profile
When I boot up my 360, I have it set to take me to the dashboard. It doesn't automatically log into my user profile, but instead waits for me to log in manually. And I don't mind that. What I do mind is that it automatically logs into the second/guest profile whenever I create one (when someone needs a profile to play with me offline, for example).
Let me repeat: it automatically logs into the guest profile, making me exit that profile before I can log into my own/main profile, but it doesn't automatically log into my main profile. Needless to say, this encourages me to delete my guest profile whenever one's not needed, so I have to recreate one whenever it is needed again.
A minor annoyance becomes a major annoyance when frequent.
Misleading advertisements
Before I bought NCAA Football '08, I checked Microsoft's official Xbox site to find out if it had co-op. Sure enough, the site listed co-op gameplay. What it failed to mention was that co-op in that football game, like so many games for the 360, is online only.
That's no minor qualification... I was more than a little disappointed when I got home with the game and learned that my family couldn't play with me, only against me. It effectively meant there is no co-op in that game for me, because the people who want to play with me don't own their own 360s, I don't know enough people with 360s to play a game with more than one other person at a time (two players online must play against one another), and -- like many gamers -- I don't find playing with strangers as fun as playing with friends and family. Catan is another game that surprised me by not having local multiplayer; only online multiplayer.
Co-op/multiplayer is "online only" or "requires 3-4 players" -- such a brief yet important description that fails to make it into so many of Microsoft's game summaries on the boxes and on their site. This is very basic information that shouldn't have to be found by scouring reviews somewhere. If it's not lying, then it's damn close.
Did I miss anything? Does anyone know a secret to opening 3-way private chat channels on Xbox Live?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
