Editorial: Moving On From The NDS

In 2008, when the Nintendo DS was at its peak, nobody really expected a slump in sales to be heading its way. Although in hindsight, all the signs were there, albeit subtly rising to the surface with Nintendo providing the obvious reactionary response by releasing new hardware in the form of another restyled Nintendo DS console.


You could argue that after nearly five years on the market, that it was time for the company to be thinking about new hardware - about replacing the existing NDS with something considerably more powerful whilst also adding in another standout feature, a talking point which could convince existing owners to move over to the new machine; the recently unveiled 3DS.

That feature, and the talking point of the latest machine, is 3D - a format brought back to the attention of the mainstream by movie studios in an attempt to re-invigorate cinema screen ticket sales, whilst also fending off digital downloads and the increasingly popular digital rental market. The very nature of the format makes it far more suitable for gaming than film however, with depth perception being far more important in trying to gauge your next jump, or in making that critical headshot. Interactive content demands high precision and definitively accurate reactions, all of which can be increased via the added depth afforded by 3D.

It’s a natural fit, and one that has the potential to immerse the user into the experience beyond what was possible with current tech, while at the same time giving Nintendo that difference for a second time running. Nobody else has 3D gaming hardware like this. No one else has a portable 3D solution outside of the cell phone.

So, given the large drop in sales and rampant piracy that has plagued the DS in recent years a change in hardware is really for the best, and in that respect not really all that unexpected. 2008 marked the highest point for NDS sales. Riding high after the constantly repeating success of Brain Training and its sequel, New Super Mario Bros, Nintendogs, and various third-party hits like Professor Layton, cracks began to appear in the machine’s previously unblemished record.

Software sales for first and third party titles were down across the board, and despite an initially strong uptake of the new DSi console, sales started to tale off a few months later. Third party publishers for the first time began cutting back on all DS operations, sighting both piracy and a saturation of games being produced for the casual market as the cause of this change. Nintendo themselves had barely released any notable titles for the system outside of the new Layton game, and another instalment in the Mario & Luigi series of RPG’s, instead relying on more sales of existing products and me-too third party clones of its own titles.

But why the sudden drop off in sales, and how come after four straight years of success is the platform slowing down so rapidly?

A number of factors have to be considered. Firstly, the casual market has seen a massive explosion ever since Nintendo struck gold with the likes of Brain Training and Nintendogs, with competing titles covering practically every avenue of potential interest, from pets, to playing doctor, and string of brain teasing games and puzzle-based adventure titles.

A crowded market is rarely a healthy market, especially when consumers are so bogged down with choice that they simply decide to vote using their wallets, by not buying anything, or simply to look elsewhere for entertainment otherwise provided by the DS. This over abundance in choice it seems is equally restrictive in the sense that the choices available are limited to certain genres and titles that casual gamers have grown accustom to appearing on the format. Outside of these genres there is little innovation, and titles aimed at the ‘core’ gaming market are mostly ignored due to a lack of familiarity even if some of those are perfectly suitable.

It appears that the bubble has broken, and that a string of similar experiences simply won’t be enough to sway a vast number of new owners to the platform, especially when there are over a hundred million of them already. Combined with the fact that the world market has just hit a sudden downturn due to the recession, and that leaves consumers vary of splashing out, something that the gaming market, despite early signs pointing otherwise, is not immune to.

The other reason why so many publishers and developers have recently been turning away from the DS, and in turn why consumers find themselves with a lack of imaginative new software is piracy. That old dog is once again up to its old tricks in a re-run of what has happen countless times before with the old gaming platforms of the 1980’s, the original PlayStation, and continuously to this day with the PC market. Like with any popular platform the NDS is far from immune from the problem, instead further feeding the pirates with its gigantic userbase.


Simple piracy in it self isn’t a huge problem for the DS, it’s the widespread scale of the issue, and the fact that it has become a fairly commonplace thing amongst casual gamers, and not just the technologically literate hardcore. Everyone from the little girl next door to parents simply out to save a few quid have turned to illegal downloading and game sharing for the DS. The popularity of many micro SD card readers for the system, such as the infamous R4, has made this phenomenon possible, and the ease of obtaining both the hardware required and the games themselves, so widespread across so many demographics.

Although Nintendo have in recent months begun to heavily crack down on large illegal game distribution operations, and hardware manufacture, they may have inadvertently left it too late. The R4 and other similar devices have too much market share now in order to be effectively combated to a point of no longer being a problem. Plus with the DS platform itself aging rapidly (it’s five years old already) there is little financial sense it trying to salvage and rebuild the success that it has seen over those five years with the same hardware. Instead it makes far more sense to concentrate on a new console altogether, one which will feature much greater protection from the pirates, and that can also instil fresh imagination into the gaming public.

Enter the 3DS.


With the selection of original NDS games quickly depleting, and the machine largely falling out of favour with the hardcore crowd to the less successful PSP, Nintendo have a chance to re-build bridges with that audience as well as provide a platform that doesn’t alienate the current casual consumer. In fact the use of 3D however gimmicky it may at first seem, may just convince those very people to jump aboard and experience a more traditional form of gaming. After all, what is there to loose, you have complete backwards compatibility with the existing DS, making the 3DS more of an upgrade than a complete replacement, along with a whole host of visualy alluring titles. Granny or little Suzie may not see the appeal, but many others will.

Importantly, the 3DS more than anything else will provide a safer development environment for developers away from the piracy ridden confines of the current NDS platform. This new sense of security will also be backed up with a fresh way of looking at handheld titles. Maybe not fresh, in the sense of new gameplay experiences, but fresh in the sense of experiencing PS2-like blockbusters in full 3D anywhere you go, in addition to fan favourites such as Mario, Zelda, Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid.

The NDS has definitely run its course, and now you can so easily see why and where most publishers development resources have gone. The shrinking selves of DS games will surely be replaced with a greater amount of 3DS titles come next year. Some may just be enhanced DS games aimed at the mainstream, whilst most look likely to be titles bread and nurtured for the ‘core’ gamer. It’s no surprise to learn that most Nintendo-based handheld software projects are being lined-up for the 3DS, both from first and third parties, and this in turn represents why DS software has dried up of late.

In the end, while it may seem like the DS is somewhat dying, and in a way it is, the future of the brand remains intact and ready for its second phase. Backwards compatibility ensures that the 3DS won’t alienate the current audience, or destroy the existing DS software chain overnight. But it will ensure the healthy continuation of the platform as a whole.

That is, of course if it becomes successful, although all signs point to it having an initially bright future. The rest, as always is up to the software and marketing, being able to convince the right people that this IS the right product for them. And with Nintendo’s recent track record that shouldn’t be a problem.

Editorial: Why Sony Mandates 720p For 3D Gaming

Creating games in 3D is an arduous task, with the need to render two separate frames (one for each eye) baring a heavy load both on the consoles and for the developer, the quest to reach that mythical 18080p status weighing in on the back of their minds against the ever increasing demands of the consumers this generation.

The solution then, it seems, is simply not to participate in such an endeavour in the first place, instead dictating somewhat more manageable terms to developers and anyone looking to venture into the 3D space. And this is exactly what Sony are said to be doing, mandating a standard of 720p for all developers wanting to make their games in 3D.

Just a few weeks after Housemarque and Ilari Kuittinen revealed on the PlayStation Blog that they had Super Stardust HD running at 1080p and 60fps in 3D, Sony's Simon Benson recently commented at the Develop conference in Brighton that the company was planning to enforce a 720p maximum resolution mandate to developers. This means that even if you are able to get your game running at a higher resolution it will be downscaled by the machine into 720p, much like what will be happening Super Stardust HD as soon as the next PS3 firmware arrives.

The reason behind the move is simple. It’s partly due to the HDMI 1.4 specification not supporting 1080p60 officially (1080p24 is the highest it will go), and to make things easier for developers by taking the pressure off in trying to get things running in 3D at 1080p by removing the option. Perhaps that is not such a bad thing as many games struggle to render in native 720p let alone 1080p, and at 60fps that whole scenario dramatically worsens considerably.

Benson also came to this conclusion and mentioned at the conference that despite the mandate being applied to most games, some ‘more cinematic’ titles which could benefit from using a higher resolution and lower framerate would be allowed access to the 1080p24 3D rendering mode supported by the console. No games would be able to use 1080p60 even if the developers had comfortably implemented it.

Sony’s argument over the use of 1080p60 then, or rather, 1080p for 3D gaming in general seems to be directly aimed at the stresses of getting games running to that standard in the first place. Benson emphasised the difficulties that many developers would be facing and told attendees that this mandate was a way of curtailing that. A preventative measure of some sorts, restrictive but at the same time ultimately beneficial, especially when you think that having more stuff on screen at 720p is usually far more impressive than a game being cut back in order to hit 1080p.

However, rendering at 1080p60 in 3D doesn’t have to mean rendering one frame for each eye, as Crytek has shown so enthusiastically at this year’s E3. Instead it is possible to render in one single frame for 3D, like with normal 2D rendering, and to simply apply a form of 2D displacement tech to the image (2D to 3D conversion) thus creating a final 3D display without any of the usual workload involved. We talked about Cytek’s solution here, although Sony have also said in the past that they were working on something very similar.

So the question is why are Sony restricting the rendering resolution on 3D games when clearly they have, or will have in the near future, a solution which circumvents rendering two frames instead of one. Surely that in itself would make things much easier for developers without taking away another all important check-box feature. But perhaps that’s the point, that for this generation 1080p is largely just that, a check-box feature that has more use on paper than practically in games development, and when you consider the potential performance costs incurred by running in 3D then it makes perfect sense.

Either way, the removal of 1080p60 and 1080p24 does very little to harm the end user. When you consider how many titles actually use the resolution effectively, and that contain more detail and visual effects when running in this mode, you can see why the chase for the supposed holy grail that is 1080p isn’t particularly justified, and could even be described as wasted.

That said, there is no doubt that some of us out there will still salivate over the potential of seeing another title pushing that magical 1080p60 resolution on consoles. It’s an incredible feat when you see it in 2D, so how much more spectacular would it be seeing it in 3D, full 1920x1080 no less. This is not something that we will be able to tell you with Sony’s proposed plans, but is it really going to make all the difference? I suspect a resounding no is the answer.

Personally I’d much rather be seeing more titles running in full 720p and with at least 2x multisampling anti-aliasing, or morphological AA at 60fps than a misguided attempt at 1080p with absolutely none of those benefits. And judging by Sony’s reaction, and indeed Crytek’s 2D displacement tech, many developers feel the same way.

Editorial: 3D Visions - The Next Arms Race?

The lure of 3D to the gaming industry is no more surprisingly than the increased focus on the format in recent film production, with many new releases being retrofitted for screenings in 3D in order to generate that extra buzz required to bring more people into the cinema. Everyone it seems is after a piece of the pie, and given the renewed public interest in viewing movies down at the local picture house it was only a matter of time until some of gaming’s big guns got on board.


Cineworld recently reported a 17% increase in ticket sales directly as a result of 3D movie screenings, and most of which were at the higher price charged for seeing a film in 3D. The effect it has had for the film industry has not gone unnoticed, with various high profile game developers stating that this new format could well be the future of videogaming as a whole.

Many state the incredibly accurate depth perception that comes from using the format, along with the increased levels of immersion when putting the player visually closer to the action - taking them perhaps further into the game than ever before - as the main reason for pushing forward with the tech.

Perhaps in this case 3D does more for most games that it does for most films. Improving our judgement of space and distance on a 2D display, separating images clearly from one another allowing us to truly experience more life-like scenarios than ever before. For gaming, the use of 3D, and in coordination with motion controls opens us up to a world in which we can feel really connected in a way that a film never could. And it’s this feeling which has driven many software developers and hardware companies into investing in its future.

With the DS in its fifth year, and the two most powerful current-gen consoles in a strong battle of one-upmanship over features, 3D represents a clear path for at least one of those two companies to distinguish themselves. Sony in particular - going for the ‘it does everything’ impression with the PS3 - sees 3D as their next milestone in gaming, hoping to become synonymous with the format in time for the next generation of consoles still a few years away.

Despite support for the format from Microsoft (although more concerned with Natal at this point) Sony in particular want to be seen as ‘the company’ who delivers the most cutting-edge of all 3D content, lining up a barrage of compatible titles at this year’s E3.

Sony are clearly aiming at the high-end here, with the prices of 3D enabled HDTV’s starting around £1700 and going up to at least £2200 for Panasonic’s reference level VT20. Admittedly not cheap, and certainly out of the mainstream user’s standard price range, which means that any uptake is going to be rather slow and distinctly pedestrian at first.

However, Sony and many other publishers see a potentially bright future going down the 3D route, ensuring their focus is strong and their software line-up defining enough to make a dent in peoples impressions. Plus in a few years time it is expected that most 3D compatible tellies will be available from at least 37” as the norm, with some smaller high-end 32” models also featuring the tech. Eventually though, every single HDTV will support the format, and its inclusion will read out like another check-box feature such as ‘100Hz processing’ or ‘HD Ready 1080p’.

Clearly this is just what Sony are counting on, and their aim to deliver the definitive 3D experience in light of this potential is understandable. Sure, it may take a few years for the tech to become widely adopted by the mainstream, and the overall cost associated with development may well go up (inevitable regardless of the inclusion of 3D), but at least they could have a much stronger position in the market as a result. Or that’s how they appear to be looking at it, adopting a standard long before it has any real presence in the consumer domain and turning it around so that it does in fact become prevalent. It’s this forward-thinking approach which catapulted the PS2 to worldwide success, but which also stalled the initial uptake of the PS3 with the insistence on pushing BluRay.

Nintendo on the other hand, are trying something altogether different. Once again they are focusing on the handheld market, in which they’ve held nothing but a dominant position since they first unleashed the GameBoy to the masses some twenty years ago. With 3D they have found a clear gap in which to exploit, however gimmicky it initially appears, and this could indeed set them apart from other manufactures in the handheld space. Yes, I’m talking about the 3DS.

Nintendo’s latest handheld is likely to be a very affordable entry into the world of 3D – below £200 price point is likely – and with complete backwards compatibility guaranteed for all NDS and DSi titles they won’t be alienating their existing user base, simply building right on top of it. Also, if rumours are to be believed the company has something else up its sleeve with the 3DS outside of its auto-stereoscopic screen.

Currently, the effect of viewing 3D images on such a small scale is relatively unproven, though somewhat tantalising, and its use in at least one Japanese smart phone has apparently yielded promising results. And perhaps this is the reason behind the push forward into that realm of an extra dimension, not only because hardly anyone else has done this before, but because Nintendo have a clear track record of taking something untested and making it work in areas others have failed (VitualBoy aside).

Disruption like with the NDS and the Wii, is the key here. They need something other than motion controls and the touch screen - which Apple have made their own, and which Sony are no doubt eying up for PSP2 - to once again separate themselves from others in the market, and they know it. 3D is one of those things, but with the option to turn it off, not the only one it seems. More surprises then? All will be revealed at E3.

Like with Sony, Nintendo not only hopes to capture a large chunk of the market, along the hearts and minds of gamers everywhere, but instead also intend to be the first ones to bring affordable 3D tech into the home. The 3DS with its estimated sub-£200 price point (I’m gambling on £169.99 or 179.99 as the clincher) has far more potential at opening up the gaming mass-market to 3D technology, in both the handheld space and the home consumer market than the exuberant price tags that accompany bleeding-edge 3D HDTV’s.

Being cheaper and more affordable is a start, but they need more than price on their side. They need to impress. But what if this new technology turns out to be something of substance, really visually impressive on the small scale? It could convince many people into buying one of those expensive 46”+ size HDTV’s we mentioned earlier, thus in turn actually helping Sony and their high-end approach to 3D gaming, and industry adoption of the format in general.

Looking at it this way, it’s not hard to see that the consumer is presented with what looks like a win-win scenario, with both ends of the pricing scale accommodated for. I also imagine that Microsoft will begin driving forward 3D support in conjunction with Natal if the PS3’s attempt to capture this new market gains momentum, especially if it has a noticeable impact in 3D HDTV sales – more TV’s sold means more opportunities for pushing the format, and greater sales potential for all that extra work. Sales of current HDTV’s jumped with the advent of high-def consoles, and then exponentially so with the eradication of standard-def CRT’s from the market.

Either way, the thing to remember is that the notion of 3D isn’t particularly new, and it will take a few years of price reductions on HDTV’s, and impressive software to convince the consumer to invest. The glasses also are another hindrance, heavier and more bulky than their cinema equivalent. Even then, it’s hard to expect any revelations, or even a major impact on the console front before the next-generation of systems is upon us. 3DS aside, which looks to comfortably occupy its own space, for now anyway. In the end the seeds are being sewn, and the groundwork being laid. All that’s left is to see how we as consumers perceive the road lying ahead, and whether or not this is indeed the path we’d like to go down.

Other than trying to predict what might happen , something tells me that this story is going to be particularly interesting, it could in effect usher in a new level of interactive entertainment with both 3D and motion controls at the forefront. Or it could simply fall flat on its backside, another reminder of what happens when the industry tries to push something that just isn’t ready. The death of classic gaming this is not, that’s for certain. But a mere an expansion into areas that bring us closer to the games we play, and the worlds we get so immersed in.

Near defining statements aside, all shall be revealed at this year’s E3 in two days time. There we will have a better view on just what each manufacturers plans are for the format, and how this much-talked about 3D thingy finally fits into place.

Editorial: No Instructions Included?

Late last week Ubisoft announced that it was ditching the use of printed instruction booklets for all of its upcoming games released later this year, starting with Shaun White Skateboarding, and following through with every new title thereafter. Their recent decision will effect all future PS3, 360 and PC titles in a scheme that the company says will not only save them a considerable amount of money, but that will also be responsible for a more environmentally friendly approach to producing videogames - they have already commissioned the use of the eco-box for its PC games, packaging which uses less overall plastic than regular boxes used for DVDs and games.

Laurent Detoc, president of Ubisoft North America stated that "Eco-friendly initiatives are important to the global community and introducing in-game digital manuals on Xbox 360 and PS3 is just the latest example of Ubisoft's ongoing commitment to being a more environmentally conscious company".

The company also claimed that the removal of instruction booklets would be beneficial to gamers, as more work would be put into creating a “more robust” digital manual held on the game disc, which would provide “easier and more intuitive access” to game information on the fly, when they say gamers need it the most.

Of course, Ubisoft’s statements uttering the fact that in this day and age that the ‘instruction booklet’ as we know it is largely redundant, is a viewpoint also held by a vast majority of mainstream gamers, evident by the lack of complaints, or even comments surrounding the increasingly paper thin booklets given with most new releases these days. One only has to look at the recent Call Of Duty outings (especially Modern Warfare 2) along with Need For Speed, and Ubi’s own Assassins Creed, to determine that by and large, in their current form, these booklets are pretty pointless. Almost to the point it seems, of being there just to fulfil a tradition started with single-coloured square pixel type games of the late seventies and the early eighties, a time in which videogame graphics were far too basic to effectively house an in-game tutorial.

Looking at these modern instruction booklets, the vast majority these days for the yearly franchise titles, and for the big annual heavy hitter sequels (COD, NFS etc), seem mainly to contain a brief handful of pages, filled with black and white text describing the controls, and maybe providing a single in-game screenshot showing off the HUD. In which case their inclusion is pretty pointless at worst, and complimentary at best, being ignored I imagine by the vast majority of gamers who pick up those titles.

Other games, like with Epic’s Gears Of War Series, Capcom’s Resident Evil 5, Street Fighter IV, or Nintendo’s Super Mario Galaxy, all have well thought out and carefully crafted booklets, which not only show players how to control the game, what the items are, and weapons available, but also provide a gamers with a back story for it’s characters, unseen artwork, hints and tips, or even just a nice read through about the world you’ll be entering as soon as the disc enters your chosen gaming machine.

Mario Galaxy for example, has detailed artwork showcasing the various moves the character has in the game, along with the various power ups he can pick up, and how they change his abilities and interactions with his environment. All of which are represented with numerous images and notes, and are a pleasure to read as well as to lovingly gaze at. Nintendo it seems understands the value of such an inclusion, not necessarily because casual gamers need to have such a thing, because most are just as likely to ignore it, but because largely, it is something that not only fans will appreciate, but also because it is a tried and tested tradition of out industry, to have a cool and colourful set of printed materials with every new purchase. It makes an item of its kind feel complete.

Likewise, the inclusion of a printed booklet in Epic’s Gears Of War serves to highlight the rich back-story surrounding the characters and locations in which the game is set, describing ‘emergence day’ and the early conflict with the Locust forces long before Marcus Fenix was imprisoned for treason. Filled with a muddy, reddish brown hue throughout, and containing intricately hand drawn artwork complementing the words about the weapons and conflict surrounding the game’s universe. It is far more than just a quick guide to how the game will, control, acting as more of a reference to a bigger world than what the actual game provides.

The same thing can be seen in most of the old 16 and 8bit titles, with games like Sonic The Hedgehog featuring descriptions and drawings of most of the enemies in the game, along with the stages that you’ll be playing through, minus the secretive last few stages, and most importantly, the actual game story itself. All this also applies to the likes of Mario, James Pond, Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Shinobi and pretty much every single title released in that era worth its salt.

Looking at instruction booklets in this way, you can see why there is still some value left to be had including one in your latest blockbuster hit, not just for completion sake, but perhaps to add a little more to the experience than just the digital content stored on the disc. I for one, like the ability when unsealing the game for the first time, to take a few moments to look over what’s included, maybe have a whiff of the box and manual when it first opens, before flicking through the pages in anticipation of what the game has in store for me.

Most, I suspect won’t care about this ‘feature’, and with the likes of Call Of Duty and Assassins Creed, I completely agree. The inclusion of the three or four page booklet with a brief controls description and photo of the game’s HUD, along with the obligatory warranty details is utterly pointless, and in my opinion a waste of time for all involved. In that case, it’s a perfect example of a series (or a game) which would benefit in not having a booklet included at all, especially when in both aforementioned titles, a definitive and easy to access controls refresher is available from the in-game pause menu.

Of course, maybe companies like Ubisoft should perhaps be looking at this from another angle entirely. Most games today are designed around strong narrative progression and focused character driven gameplay, so it would make a lot of sense in keeping the fat down with regards to background in-game cinematics, with a brief look on such a thing in the game’s instruction booklet instead. Combined with fresh, unseen artwork, introductions to all the lead characters, along with all the usual stuff, it could well be something to consider investing in. Maybe, and I would hate this to happen myself, is that the instruction booklet we know could become some checkbox feature on some collectors edition, doling out content that would have been commonplace in games just a decade or so ago, with the standard edition completely barren of such wares.

Overall, this debate on whether or not we ‘need’ or require an instruction booklet to go along with our games, is something which will definitely rear its head again. I imagine that in the near future we will have some developers that absolutely value what the inclusion of printed materials does for a product, whilst some all too keen to cut back costs and provide a perhaps more customisable digital alternative to suit the 21st century gamer. Either way, I can still see a road in which the loved, hated, instruction book can continue.

For better or worse times are changing, as are the people that play games and make games, in which it is inevitable that certain things will change in order to find the right balance between necessity and nostalgia.

Personally, I won’t be shedding any tears for lack of printed materials in any of Ubisoft’s, Activision’s, or EA’s offerings, but if the day comes when developers who put so much efforts into crafting a finely designed traditional instruction booklet comes to an end, then I suspect that I won’t be in the least bit pleased, and decidedly saddened by the whole affair. Maybe it’s time that more gamers stood up and actually started to care about what comes inside their much loved videogame packages, rather than trying to get everything for as little as possible, or maybe, we should except that the market and its audience as changed so much, that the ‘gamer’ and ‘videogaming’ as us old timers know it, is well and truly a thing of the past.

Editorial: Preowned & Project Ten Dollar

The debate over the second-hand (preowned) market has been a thorn in the side of both retailers and publishers. With supermarkets selling games at below cost price, retailers have responded by pushing preowned further into the public eye, and publishers are left feeling short-changed by the lack of any income via sales of used games, determined to claw back some of the money they have lost, which once would be found in selling brand new releases of older titles at cheaper prices. All the while retailers are constantly upping their prices of preowned games whilst reducing or keeping the trade-in price low. Consumers on the other hand are buying more games than ever, playing through more, and exchanging them more regularly as to keep being able to purchase new titles as soon as they are released.


It’s all a bit on the messy side, with different views held up high by all three parties, and a behind the scenes battleground between retailers and publishers, consumers caught right in the middle. As always with such complex matters, it’s neither simple, not elegant finding a solution, and sometimes perhaps, requires all individuals concerned to give up a little in order to do what’s best for everyone in the long run.

At the forefront of this is something EA like to call ‘project ten dollar’. It is a policy which entails the company providing a sizable chunk of downloadable content for a game at launch, for no extra cost to the consumer, redeemable via a download code contained inside the box. The first release to feature this was Mass Effect 2 with a code for the ‘Cerberus Network’ included in the box, and this will be repeated with the forthcoming Battlefield Bad Company 2, which is said to include a large chunk of DLC available from day one, all included for your standard £39.99 when you buy the game. Like with most DLC codes it can only be redeemed once, so anyone buying the game used will have to fork out $10, or what will probably be around £10 in British money, to get the extras.


Sony however, seem to be taking things a step further, by actually making standard features locked out on the actual game discs, until the gamer uses a redeem code inside the box to enable access. The game in question is the latest Socom title for PSP, in which the multiplayer mode is locked out until you activate the code contained in the box online. For users who purchase a preowned copy, they are expected to pay up a fee of around $20 to get the code from Sony. Now seeing as Socom is a primarily online title it isn’t as bad as it sounds, although not allowing people to play what is arguably the point of the game just because they bought it second-hand, is perhaps just a bit too unreasonable for many consumers to accept.

The EA system however doesn’t sound too shabby, and actually provides a good reason for you to pay up a few quid extra over a second-hand copy for the privilege. Certainly for people like me who only buy new (unless it’s sealed) can feel rewarded for supporting developers, and hopefully which will lead to new IP and more niche titles being made - though I’m sceptical on this front. It’s almost a win/win situation, except for the fact that not everyone can afford to buy a new game at launch.


There are many gamers who rely on trade-ins to be able to afford new releases, and part of that appeal is a reasonable trade in price, one which brings down the cost of the game to that of a much older title. For example, after playing Bioshock 2 I could trade that game in for around £22 and get the money off something like Heavy Rain, paying only £18 rather than the full £40 if I were just to buy the game outright. For younger games, students, and people who aren’t on a high income, it allows them to purchase a greater number of games per year than if they couldn’t trade their old ones in. The publisher’s still get their share of the profits by the retailer buying stock of the game in the first place, and the gamer goes home happy because they’ve saved some money. It could be argued that more people trading in equals more people buying games. In addition it also means that more people are likely to spend their money on unproven titles rather than just the big AAA releases, which surely benefits new IP to an extent.

However the grey area, and the one that is offensive to so many publishers, is the fact that once a game is traded-in and sold by the retailer, they make absolutely no money from that sale. In addition if a consumer trades-in their old games for a preowned title, the publishers make no money. The worst cases are when gamers are trading in a copy of last week’s new release for a preowned version of this week’s newest hit, traded in only a few days after release and sold for a huge mark up by the retailer. Again the publishers don’t see any of those profits. Also an added problem with this, is that they cannot judge how well a game that didn’t do well at launch has sold later on down the line. Titles like Mirrors Edge and Dead Space have become cult classics (especially Dead Space) through strong sales of cheap preowned versions, brought on by via word of mouth recommendations, and good reviews about the game by the press. Of course, it would help that publishers were at least getting a cut of these late sales, as it would help in funding future new projects based on new ideas, or niche avenues.


The big issue here, is that many publishers and people inside the industry believe that preowned games de-value the price, and perceived worth of new releases, especially when the mere notion of trading-in week on week for new titles incites that your hard-earned work, costing millions of dollars, becomes effectively nothing more than a disposable item, rather than something for people to keep and enjoy over a long period of time. This is something the likes of EA and many other publishers are trying to reverse. You only have to look back as little as seven or eight years ago, when new versions of games were still selling quite well as a brand new item months after release, yet at a reduced price which still gave the publisher back some income, whilst providing a cheaper alternative for consumers. Effectively you could keep selling a new version of the game for much longer than you can now, benefiting all of the industry whilst at the same time allowing games to consistently pick up older titles without the lottery of seeing if they had been traded in.

This is something that I myself would like to see, a greater selection of new stock available in store when compared to the huge selection of used available, not always in good condition. Indeed, when browsing non-specialist stores there seem to be many back catalogue titles available new, whilst at the big specialist chains you mostly only have the option of buying an alternative second-hand copy.

So what if ‘Project Ten Dollar’ does become a success for publishers, what will that mean for the industry?

For retail, initially it would have the effect of reducing the selling price of preowned games; in addition the trade-in price would also be lowed to maintain the sometimes-ridiculous amount of margin retailers make on, to keep profits up so new releases can be sold for less than RRP to compete with supermarkets and other discount happy outlets. It would also mean an even harder push towards the cheaper preowned alternative as well as accessories sales, damaging the once good customer service even further into the hard sales culture it has become.

Consumer wise, they would benefit by getting extra content previously reserved for quick release DLC a few months down the line, an added extra to say thank you for buying new. Although some publishers and developers may try to cut down the game intentionally to promote this ‘benefit’, when in reality you could be ending up with exactly the same product before this whole ‘Ten Dollar’ idea came to market. It might also become harder for certain gamers to be able to afford new releases, instead choosing to wait until the price goes down on the new version, or instead just buying a cheaper preowned copy after a price reduction, sans later buying the DLC. Alternatively people may be turned further towards piracy and illegal downloading, chipping their consoles to get their fix. Of course most will simply, I imagine, be more than happy to pay up the full £40 more often, especially if it means that they will see the money being channelled into new ideas and IP in addition to the usual AAA blockbuster releases (I know that I would).

Publishers will naturally get a greater slice of the retail pie than with what there getting at the moment, so long as sales of new titles don’t slow down as people may decide to hold off buying, or simply may no longer have the money to do so. In effect publishers could go back to having a new copy available in the shelves for longer, gradually over the year reducing its price in small increments allowing more gamers to pick up the title as an alternative to preowned, thus making more income from the same title over and over. This potentially would mean the end of selling large AAA titles such as Call Of Duty for the full £40 some two years after its release, especially if they don’t want customers picking up the cheaper used alternative.


These however, are only some of the changes which might take place in our much loved, but often-contradictory industry. It’s far too early to accurately gauge just what will happen, how retailers, publishers, and consumers will react, as well as to how far reaching the implications will be. One thing’s one certain though, it will make for a long and interesting debate, one which is sure to spurn on a wealth of ideas, along with an obligatory backlash and leaving many confused as to just what is going to happen.

With piracy, price discounting and preowned all presenting the industry each with its own set of problems, each interlinked with one another, it’s only fair that the industry finds new avenues to explore profit and self-preservation, whether it be with DLC, bonus code incentives for new games, or simply by thinking outside traditional consoles altogether.

Either way we at IQGamer will be following these events closely.

For more thoughtful discussion and insights into other issues surrounding the gaming world as a whole, be sure to check out gamesindustry.biz for another informative read.