Synaptic Sugar

Image above: G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, Copyright (C) 2009 Electronic Arts Inc.

The project I’ve worked on for the past year at Double Helix Games has now been released: it’s G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, the multi-platform game tied to the movie by the same name. I can honestly say it’s been an interesting and educative experience, from which I’ve learned a lot.

Reviews of the game so far have been mixed, some recognizing its merits as well as its flaws, others unmercifully bashing it. Amongst the various observations there have been some which were quite superficial, one review even going so far as attacking Dennis Quaid (who plays General Hawk in the movie) and the rest of the movie cast specifically for the quality of their voice acting in the game; which would be an opinion any reviewer could be entitled to, if not for the fact that neither Mr. Quaid nor the rest of the cast (with the exception of Joseph Gordon-Levitt (1)) lent their voice to our game. If anything, this critique should probably be a testament to how good a Dennis Quaid the actual voice actor who plays Hawk in the game is.

Another funny remark has stated how the accompanying soundtrack is “ripped off” the movie, when in reality it was specifically composed for the game and skillfully executed by an orchestra (anyone could have confirmed that with minimal research). In my opinion it is in fact one of the best features of this game. In addition, I’m still looking for this mysterious “lava level” some reviewers mentioned; I certainly cannot remember it being part of the product at any point during the development.

Granted, The Rise of Cobra has some flaws, which clearly could not and did not go unnoticed; however, my personal opinion is the game still manages to offer a good dose of fun, particularly if played in co-op with a friend at Advanced or Hardcore difficulty. And I believe fun is half the battle.

(1) see game credits.

Actress Isabella Rossellini recently wrote, directed and starred in a number of shorts for Sundance Channel describing mating processes in insects and various invertebrates. The series is called “Green Porno”; here’s a trailer. On first impression one might comment with “WTF?”, but if one has the patience to watch the trailer multiple times, his or her opinion is likely to change to “Huh?”.

I made a reference to Canadian laws requiring contests to be open to participants without a purchase and/or through a skill test in a previous post, when I hadn’t heard of such laws yet and was wondering whether they indeed existed (see "Making it harder for Canada"). It turned out they do, and I’ve recently heard of another example: the entry fee for Blizzard’s World of Warcraft North American Arena Tournament. The tournament allows players of World or Warcraft to compete in regional player-versus-player battles for a chance to fight in the world championships and win real prizes and quite fair amounts of cash. In North America, like in Europe, the tournament requires participants to pay an entry fee of $20 (€15 in Europe - real money, not an in-game equivalent); however, because of said Canadian laws, the fee is waived in Canada, and that’s where Blizzard shows its creativity. Here’s an excerpt from the Official Rules:

The Entry Fee for the Tournament is $20.00 USD for the First Qualification Round of the Tournament, and $20.00 USD for the Second Qualification Round of the Tournament. Canadian residents are not required to pay an Entry Fee in order to enter. Instead, Canadian residents may enter by submitting a 250 word typewritten essay comparing the video gaming culture in Canada to the video gaming culture in the United States on 8 ½ x 11 inch paper and mailing their essay to Essay Entry for The North American Blizzard Entertainment Arena Tournament, P.O Box 18979, Irvine, CA 92623. Essay entries must be received no later than March 31, 2008 in order to be eligible. Essay entrants represent and warrant that the essay is their original work and does not infringe the rights of any third party. By entering, essay entrants hereby grant, without further consideration, all right, title and interest in and to their essay to Sponsor.

No conditions are imposed on the essays, so they constitute a sort of free-of-charge entry form (as per the aforementioned laws), and they’re asked to be kept short, but perhaps at the same time they can offer a little insight on how to strengthen Blizzard’s presence in Canada (the “Sponsor” in the above wording is Blizzard Entertainment) — and this way they can still get something out of it. I think it’s clever.

I don’t like to leave ends loose, so I’ll follow up to at least part of a previous post in which I mentioned the game Manhunt 2 and its troubles with national classification committees ("Blind supervision"). After having been successfully released in the US last October, although with a rating of “Mature” (which, if on one hand let Rockstar Games avoid the dreaded “Adults Only” rating, had imposed a necessity of censoring parts of the original game), the game in question seems to finally be able to see the light (of stores) in the UK as well.

You may recall from the previous post that the British Board of Film Classification had initially refused to give Manhunt 2 any rating at all, preventing it from reaching the stores in any form. Rockstar did not sit idle since then though, but when they submitted the revised edition to the BBFC they again rejected it, only to have the decision overturned by the UK Video Appeals Committee, forcing the case to end up in court; this didn’t seem to end well for Manhunt 2, as the High Court ruled in favor of the BBFC citing a misinterpretation of the law on the VAC’s part. In a, perhaps unexpected, turn of events, the VAC subsequently agreed to ignore the High Court’s decision and give the game an “18″ certificate, making it “adults only” but at least allowing its commercialization.

I’ve already expressed my thoughts on this kind of censorship and will not repeat them here. It’s worthy to mention how the case was born with the alleged influence the first Manhunt game had on the murder of teenager Stefan Pakeerah, a link that was denied both by the police, who identified drug-related robbery as the motive, and the judge presiding over the case in court at the end of the investigations, who placed sole responsibility on the murderer (moreover, Manhunt was owned by the victim, not the murderer); such a missing link was nonetheless advertised as solid and true by the media and a member of Parliament. However, if there was no such link, who should have been censored instead?

I recently found a relatively old (dating back to November 2007) interview to producer and game design legend David Perry while reading articles on Gamasutra, the well-known game industry news website. The interview itself is highly interesting for a variety of reasons, but among other things I would like to quote a point on in-game advertising (since I mentioned the topic last October, see "Hellgate: localhost") that I find quite insightful. Here’s an excerpt worth commenting on:

“Players will have no problem with advertising if you don’t charge full price for your game and then include a little bit of paper that tells people that you’re sending their IP address to agencies and cover the game in adverts,” Perry joked, referring to player backlash over Battlefield 2142.

Another condition required for players to accept in-game ads is that you: “Don’t delay or interrupt the gamer at any time with advertising, or require them to click anything to get rid of it,” [...] “Give them something valuable in return - obviously a free game is great. Make advertising an exchange.”

I believe the last point in particular is the key. If companies want to successfully introduce advertising in games, they should follow a model that is as unobtrusive and transparent as possible, and should give something tangible in return to the players. Moreover, I add, if the ads are not custom-tailored to fit in the game context, the experience for the players can be severely damaged (how does an ad for the (real) DVD release of the movie Ghost Rider fit in a game set in the 22nd century?). In other words, they should follow a model that TV advertising is not following at all; but given the peculiarities of the gaming culture and platforms, the choice of imitating the TV model as it is, as undoubtedly many companies that are more eager to fatten their wallets than to offer a pleasant and engaging gaming experience are ready to do, would be little more than a failure.