knockknock.biz luggage tags. Photo courtesy of justinph.

I guess it's finally time for me to level up.

It was the summer of '99 when I convinced my then editor to send me on a tour of the U.S. videogame industry. When I finally returned three weeks later, my head was still spinning. I felt as though I'd seen the future of entertainment. It was then that I made it my mission to put NEWSWEEK's coverage of this growing medium on the map. I did that in print, with cover stories on the Japanese launch of the PlayStation 2 and the spread of online gaming. I did it online, with the debut of the blog N'Gai Croal's Level Up. I did it on television, with appearances on MSNBC and CNN. You all watched me push, prod, praise, scold, discuss and debate videogames across multiple media, both mainstream and enthusiast. That's because my editors were prescient enough to let me apply my talents and establish my reach beyond the magazine, from co-blogging with MTV News to writing a monthly column for Edge and more. For this, I say to them all, thank you.

Having achieved all of this, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that I've accomplished what I set out to do ten years ago. And now it's time for me to take that decade’s worth of accumulated knowledge and do something else with it. After Friday March 6th, my passions will take me beyond the world of journalism. I’ll be wearing many hats on this new journey: videogame design consultant, media strategist, consumer technology reporter, columnist, blogger and, as always, provocateur. You’ll be able to keep track of my various adventures at ngaicroal.com, and feel free to reach out to me via email at ncroalbiz@gmail.com. It’s been a pleasure conversing with all of you, and I look forward to continuing our dialogue in the years to come.

Cheers,

 The Parthenon in Athens, Greece. Photo courtesy of wallyg.

Are reviews primarily a consumer guide, or should they serve another purpose? Do review scores deter intelligent discussion of videogames? Is the presence or absence of a review score the only difference between a reviewer and a critic? What is the role of the reviewer when the Internet is democratizing published opinion? How should reviews and reviewers evolve in light of the emergence and growth of Flash games, small games, indie games and user-generated games?

These questions and more were on the mind of N'Gai Croal, John Davison and Shawn Elliott last summer when they decided to expand their conversation to a number of noted reviewers, writers, bloggers and reporters for a published email symposium on game reviews. (See below for the full list of participants.) The planned list of topics include Review Scores; Review Policy, Practice and Ethics; Reader Backlash; Reviews in the Age of Social media; Reviews in the Mainstream Media; Casual, Indie, and User-Generated Games; Reviews vs. Criticism; and Evolving the Review. The participants are as follows:

Participants

• Leigh Alexander, Gamasutra/Sexy Videogameland/Variety
• Harry Allen, Media Assassin
• Robert Ashley, freelancer
• Tom Chick, freelancer
• N'Gai Croal, Level Up/Newsweek
• John Davison, What They Play
• Shawn Elliott, 2K Boston
• Jeff Gerstmann, Giant Bomb
• Kieron Gillen, Rock, Paper, Shotgun
• Dan Hsu, Sore Thumbs Blog
• Francesca Reyes, Official Xbox Magazine
• Stephen Totilo, MTV News

The topic for Round 1, which will be published here in installments over the next several days, is Review Scores. Previously, we published Part I, Part II and Part III; today, we conclude the Review Scores portion of our symposium with Part IV. To read today's section in its entirety, click on the link below.

 The Parthenon in Athens, Greece. Photo courtesy of cambiodefractal.

Are reviews primarily a consumer guide, or should they serve another purpose? Do review scores deter intelligent discussion of videogames? Is the presence or absence of a review score the only difference between a reviewer and a critic? What is the role of the reviewer when the Internet is democratizing published opinion? How should reviews and reviewers evolve in light of the emergence and growth of Flash games, small games, indie games and user-generated games?

These questions and more were on the mind of N'Gai Croal, John Davison and Shawn Elliott last summer when they decided to expand their conversation to a number of noted reviewers, writers, bloggers and reporters for a published email symposium on game reviews. (See below for the full list of participants.) The planned list of topics include Review Scores; Review Policy, Practice and Ethics; Reader Backlash; Reviews in the Age of Social media; Reviews in the Mainstream Media; Casual, Indie, and User-Generated Games; Reviews vs. Criticism; and Evolving the Review. The participants are as follows:

Participants

• Leigh Alexander, Gamasutra/Sexy Videogameland/Variety
• Harry Allen, Media Assassin
• Robert Ashley, freelancer
• Tom Chick, freelancer
• N'Gai Croal, Level Up/Newsweek
• John Davison, What They Play
• Shawn Elliott, 2K Boston
• Jeff Gerstmann, Giant Bomb
• Kieron Gillen, Rock, Paper, Shotgun
• Dan Hsu, Sore Thumbs Blog
• Francesca Reyes, Official Xbox Magazine
• Stephen Totilo, MTV News

The topic for Round 1, which will be published here in installments over the next several days, is Review Scores. Last week we published Part I and Part II; now we continue with Part III. To read today's section in its entirety, click on the link below.

 The Parthenon in Athens, Greece. Photo courtesy of caribb.

Are reviews primarily a consumer guide, or should they serve another purpose? Do review scores deter intelligent discussion of videogames? Is the presence or absence of a review score the only difference between a reviewer and a critic? What is the role of the reviewer when the Internet is democratizing published opinion? How should reviews and reviewers evolve in light of the emergence and growth of Flash games, small games, indie games and user-generated games?

These questions and more were on the mind of N'Gai Croal, John Davison and Shawn Elliott last summer when they decided to expand their conversation to a number of noted reviewers, writers, bloggers and journalists for a published email symposium on game reviews. (See below for the full list of participants.) The planned list of topics include Review Scores; Review Policy, Practice and Ethics; Reader Backlash; Reviews in the Age of Social media; Reviews in the Mainstream Media; Casual, Indie, and User-Generated Games; Reviews vs. Criticism; and Evolving the Review. The participants are as follows:

Participants

• Leigh Alexander, Gamasutra/Sexy Videogameland/Variety
• Harry Allen, Media Assassin
• Robert Ashley, freelancer
• Tom Chick, freelancer
• N'Gai Croal, Level Up/Newsweek
• John Davison, What They Play
• Shawn Elliott, 2K Boston
• Jeff Gerstmann, Giant Bomb
• Kieron Gillen, Rock, Paper, Shotgun
• Dan Hsu, Sore Thumbs Blog
• Francesca Reyes, Official Xbox Magazine
• Stephen Totilo, MTV News

The topic for Round 1, which will be published here in installments over the next several days, is Review Scores. Yesterday we published Part I. Today we continue with Part II; to read this section in its entirety, click on the link below.

 The Parthenon in Athens, Greece. Photo courtesy of tsak_d.

Are reviews primarily a consumer guide, or should they serve another purpose? Do review scores deter intelligent discussion of videogames? Is the presence or absence of a review score the only difference between a reviewer and a critic? What is the role of the reviewer when the Internet is democratizing published opinion? How should reviews and reviewers evolve in light of the emergence and growth of Flash games, small games, indie games and user-generated games?

These questions and more were on the mind of N'Gai Croal, John Davison and Shawn Elliott last summer when they decided to expand their conversation to a number of noted reviewers, writers, bloggers and journalists for a published email symposium on game reviews. (See below for the full list of participants.) The planned list of topics include Review Scores; Review Policy, Practice and Ethics; Reader Backlash; Reviews in the Age of Social media; Reviews in the Mainstream Media; Casual, Indie, and User-Generated Games; Reviews vs. Criticism; and Evolving the Review. The participants are as follows:

• Leigh Alexander, Gamasutra/Sexy Videogameland/Variety
• Harry Allen, Media Assassin
• Robert Ashley, freelancer
• Tom Chick, freelancer
• N'Gai Croal, Level Up/Newsweek
• John Davison, What They Play
• Shawn Elliott, 2K Boston
• Jeff Gerstmann, Giant Bomb
• Kieron Gillen, Rock, Paper, Shotgun
• Dan Hsu, Sore Thumbs Blog
• Francesca Reyes, Official Xbox Magazine
• Stephen Totilo, MTV News
  

The topic for Round 1, which will be published here in installments over the next several days, is Review Scores. To read Part I in its entirety, click on the link below.

 Grand Theft Auto IV, developed by Rockstar North and published by Rockstar Games

Yesterday, the stock price of Take-Two Interactive fell after the company announced a fourth quarter loss of $15 million (up from a loss off $7.1 million a year ago) even though its revenue of $323 million (up from $293 million a year earlier) was greater than expected. What's interesting is that in early November, according to Bloomberg, Zelnick all but declared Take-Two recession-proof, stating "With entertainment products, if there’s something you must have, typically consumers are going to buy it....So far, we’re not seeing any negative influence of the overall economy on sales of our titles.” Yesterday, however, Zelnick was siging a different tune. "We too are influenced by a very difficult set of economic conditions and the world looks a lot worse than it did just a couple of months ago," he admitted.

The news wasn't all bad, however. For the entire fiscal year, Take-Two is projecting a profit. And the best news of all was that the core staff of the studio that's primarily responsible for those profits--Rockstar Games' Dan Houser, Sam Houser, Leslie Benzies and unnamed others--has signed new contracts with Take-Two through the year 2012. More interesting, however, than the fact that the new deal would be "primarily based on a profit sharing agreement," was the following paragraph:

In addition, Take-Two has agreed to fund the future development of certain new intellectual property to be owned by a newly formed company controlled by key Rockstar Games team members and published exclusively by Take-Two.

In other words, the Housers and their inner circle retain creative control of the franchises they've created, including Grand Theft Auto. They received a rich new deal. And they will also be able to create brand-new franchises for a separate company that they control--note that the release doesn't specify who owns the company, so Take-Two could have a stake in it--with those new games being funded and distributed by Take-Two. We were impressed when Bungie got to keep its name upon departing from Microsoft during the Flight of the Killer B's, but this strikes us as a far better and shrewder deal, with the Housers and company having the best of both worlds: they get to strike out on their own without ceding control of the house that they built.

For further analysis, we turned to Wedbush Morgan analyst, Michael Pachter. Here's what he had to say:

To read our Q&A with Pachter, click on the link below.

 Midnight Club Los Angeles, developed by Rockstar San Diego and published by Rockstar Games

UPDATE AND CLARIFICATION: Rockstar Games has just forwarded us a copy of the email blast they sent out earlier today about the patch being issued simultaneously for Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. Here's what the email said:

A title update is currently available for both the Xbox 360 and PLAYSTATION 3 versions of Midnight Club: Los Angeles. The Xbox 360 update adds support for additional leaderboards for tournaments on the Rockstar Games Social Club, broader multiplayer match searching, and upgraded streaming and performance. The update also brings improved AI balance to adjust dynamically to user skill level.

Separately, the folks at Rockstar wanted to clarify that players were never required to play red-level races in the pre-patched version of the game. We regret the confusion.

***

Despite our use of the word "patch," in the headline, let it be known that the fine gentlemen and ladies at Rockstar Games prefer to say "update." We learned this yesterday when we stopped by Rockstar's Manhattan offices to chat with Rockstar vice president of development Jeronimo Barrera about the company's recently released racing title Midnight Club Los Angeles. Apparently, inexperienced gamers were struggling to progress through the game, and just as Rockstar is doing for PC gamers who've complained of problems with Grand Theft Auto IV, console owners of Midnight Club Los Angeles will have their troubles wiped away with a patch, er update that goes up today for Xbox 360 owners and at an as yet unspecified time for PS3 users.

"Obviously, we like to listen to our fans," says Barrera. "We've done a bit of tuning on the dynamic race structure so that early on, it will be easier for novice players to get to the later races." Asked how they achieved this, Barrera says they wanted to keep it feeling natural, so they focused on how and how often the computer-controlled cars screw up on turns and intersections rather than on the rubber-band approach to A.I. that typifies many racing games. The tweaks, we're told, cover roughly the first third of the game.

To read the rest of our post on Midnight Club Los Angeles, click on the link below.

 The redesignedGameHouse front page

The best things in life are free, or so the song goes--and that goes double for those toiling in our troubled economic times. But according to John Barbour, the recently appointed president of RealNetworks' games division, the economy is just part of the reason why, starting today, the company's GameHouse casual games site will offer a new free casual game for download. Every day. For the foreseeable future. The first title to be made available under this offer is the hidden object game Mortimer Becket and the Time Paradox, which is currently the most popular title at GameHouse.

"The gaming world has really gone through a bit of a revelation," Barbour says. "People thought games were about processing power, but it's about great games," he adds, citing the success of the Wii, the record-setting subscriber base for World of Warcraft, and the growing prominence of casual games. He reminded us that GameHouse had already announced a partnership with Capcom to bring games like Mortimer Beckett and the Secrets of Spooky Manor to the Wii; Tropix to the DS, and that it even has a WiiWare title, Boingz, going live on November 24th. (We inquired about Xbox Live Arcade and Playstation Network; Barbour said that those platforms could become more viable for GameHouse titles as their audiences broadened further.)

Barbour's goal is to get existing gamers to try his company's games as well as non-gamers who may be curious, but have been reluctant to try their titles out. The Web is, of course, chock full of free Flash-based games, but even though Barbour and his crew may face some challenges breaking through the clutter, he says they're up to it. "It's about the experience and branding over the long term," he says. "Someone can come to a site like ours and get quality games for free. No-one with our scale and experience is offering that right now." We're curious ourselves to see what kind of response this free-game-of-the-day offer receives.

To read GameHouse's press release in its entirety, click on the link below.

Update: Post a story, and all of a sudden, more sources jump out of the woodwork, to say nothing of similar stories from competing outlets. We've spoken with four additional sources since our original post went live, and it appears that our original source's statement that there would be an extra two days specifically set aside for the public--Friday June 5th and Saturday June 6th--may have been incorrect. We're working to pin that down, and as soon as we find out, we'll whip up another post. Separately, we're also looking to gather information about what criteria the ESA will use to admit a broader audience than it has to the previous two E3s, and to find out--as one journalist asked us privately and as many fanboys would like to know--whether the infamous booth babes of years past will make a comeback of their own. Stay tuned.

***

Level Up has just learned that after long, bruising and politically difficult negotiations, the Entertainment Software Association is preparing to announce tomorrow that E3 2009 will take place at the Los Angeles Convention Center during the first week of June--and that for the first time, E3 will officially open its doors to the public at large. According to a source close to the process, the convention floor and meeting rooms will open on Tuesday June 2nd to media and industry professionals. On Friday June 5th and Saturday June 6th, however, the show floor will open up to the public. What about the famous press conferences from Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony, along with a handful of third party publishers? Our source told us to "expect a boat load of press conferences on Monday during the day and on Tuesday morning."

Internally, the ESA and its members are referring to the event as a "prosumer show," a term our source found puzzling. Presumably it refers to the ESA's intent to reach out to not necessarily the world at large, but to media, industry professionals and the most avid gamers. For while attendance is expected to rise dramatically from the 2008 show, our source informed us that the ESA is aiming to cap next year's attendance at 40,000. That's significantly less than the record 70,000 people that attended E3 in 2005, and it's also less than the nearly 60,000 people who attended this year's Penny Arcade Expo in August in downtown Seattle.

Three years ago, when the ESA decided to drastically scale back E3 in response to the annual carping about the show's cost to its members, industry scuttlebutt pegged the Four Horsemen most responsible for the original format's demise as the three console manufacturers--Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo--and leading third party publisher Electronic Arts. But as the song goes, sometimes you don't know what you got 'til it's gone, and two years of the new min-E3--first spread out over downtown Santa Monica, then as a shell of its former self back at the L.A. Convention Center--was pleasing no-one, to say nothing of publishers like Activision Blizzard, which pulled out of E3 and the ESA entirely. Clearly, something had to be done.

To read the rest of our exclusive post on the new E3, click on the link below.

Between penetrating interviews and marathon gaming sessions, the staff of Level Up has been known to click over to The Drudge Report for up-to-the-minute headlines in news, politics and gossip. A few minutes ago, we came across the following headline: "PUTIN TOPS VANITY FAIR NEW ESTABLISHMENT LIST; MURDOCH NO. 2..." We clicked on the story, where, lo and behold, we found the entire 100-slot list from the October issue of Vanity Fair. Here's how Vanity Fair describes the highly scientific methodology behind its rankings system:

The Vanity Fair 100 represents a global, movable band of thinkers, owners, creators, and buyers who are the tastemakers, trendsetters, opinion formers and agenda creators in the worlds of politics, entertainment, media, business, technology, and fashion. Entry into the ranks of the V.F. 100 is based on a number of factors: wealth and influence, as well as such intangibles as vision, philanthropy, and the x factor.

Being named to the list is considered to be an honor of some prestige, and, in the past, we've known publicists who've spent considerable time and effort to ensure that their clients would be so recognized. Previous videogame-related honorees include Electronic Arts chairman Lawrence (Larry) F. Probst III in 2004 (#32, between actor Tom Cruise at #31 and Fox News chief Roger Ailes at #33) and 2005 (#33, below Ailes at #32 but above Cruise at #34). PlayStation CEO Kaz Hirai hasn't yet made the list, but he was named a "mogul in waiting" while seving as the head of the game company's North American operation. So how did videogame luminaries fare this year?

To read the rest of our post in its entirety, including the entire Vanity Fair 2008 New Establishment List, click on the link below:

Earlier today, the Port Washington, NY-based NPD Group, which tracks sales data for the videogame industry and other sectors, issued a press release about a new service that it would be offering along with its counterparts in the U.K. and Japan. Titled the "Top Global Markets Report," the three companies state that it will be "the first report to integrate point-of-sale (POS) data for video game software sales in the world’s largest games markets," specifically the United States (NPD), the U.K. (Chart-Track) and Japan (Enterbrain). To clarify some details in the announcement, we dashed off some questions to NPD toys and videogames analyst Anita Frazier and corporate marketing director David Riley. Here's what they wrote back:

How did this collaboration among The NPD Group, Gfk Chart-Track Ltd and Enterbrain come about? Who approached who first?

David Riley: The foundation for this was built back in 2004 when we met with Enterbrain at E3. NPD's relationship with Enterbrain grew from there. We've had long-standing relationships and various business partnerships with both GfK and Chart-Track, so it only made sense to form this alliance.

Will the Top Global Markets Report be issued in North America simultaneously with the monthly NPD videogame reports ? If not, how soon afterwards can we expect the global report?

Anita Frazier: This is a top global markets report, not a comprehensive global tracker. The report will be issued to subscribing clients. The Global Markets database won't be available simultaneously with the standard U.S. database. It will be released a few days after but we don't have a set schedule at this time.

Which parts of the report will be made available to media and the public? Can we expect to receive both hardware and software data?

To read the rest of our Q&A in its entirety, click on the link below.

 The Cars' 1978 debut album, "The Cars"

As the Guitar Hero and Rock Band franchises compete for the hearts and minds of ersatz rockers around the world, both sides are doing their best to lock up exclusives. For instance, there's the recently released Aerosmith team-up with Guitar Hero, an an arrangement whose exclusivity was first reported on Level Up by Newsweek writer Ashley Harris. Rock Band has made similar arrangements with bands like The Who. We asked Harris to look into whether The Cars, whose eponymous debut record was the second full-length album released on the Rock Band Music Store, had entered into a comparable agreement with Harmonix and MTV Games for Rock Band. Harris contacted Rhino Records, a division of Warner Music Group, for comment. Here's what spokesperson Jason Elzy had to say:

To read the rest of this post, click on the link below. 

Over the past couple of weeks, several publishers have released their quarterly earnings reports: among them, Electronic Arts, Ubisoft and THQ. Apart from a title slipping its ship date from one quarter to the next, there were few surprises to be found...except for the fact that of the three publishers listed above, two of them declared that the lion's share of their console revenues had been derived from the third-place platform: Playstation 3. Electronic Arts gave its breakdown as 17 percent PS3, 10 percent Xbox 360 and 7 percent Wii. For Ubisoft, it was 21 percent PS3, 9 percent Xbox 360 and 11 percent Wii. (THQ was the exception, with 4.8 percent PS3, 14.6 percent Xbox 360 and 17 percent Wii.) How could this be, given the installed base lead that the first-place Wii and second-place 360 currently possess over the PS3?

For an answer, we turned to Wedbush Morgan analyst and The Who's number one fan Michael Pachter. Here's what he had to say in our email exchange:

To read Pachter's explanation, click on the link below.

 Media Molecule's Alex Evans demonstrating LittleBigPlanet during E3 2008 

A couple of weeks ago, we wrote a piece for the "Global Literacy 2008" special edition of Newsweek magazine. In it, we argued that the Internet is the new sweatshop, by looking at properties ranging from YouTube to Spore that are being built on top of use-generated content. Since we could only use brief snippets of these email interviews in the print edition of Newsweek, we thought you might appreciate reading the game-related Q&As in their entirety. We previously heard from Spore Creator Will Wright and Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter; we conclude our series with Media Molecule technical director Alex Evans, whose upcoming game LittleBigPlanet is expected to ship in October.

What convinced you that it might be possible to create a successful console game primarily around user-generated content?

Games that involve/include some form of creativity have a rich heritage, and there are some great examples if you look back over the history of video games. Going back to the 8-bit home computer era, Shoot-em up Construction Kit was a great piece of software, and in the 16-bit era we had a whole genre of ‘God Games’ that used creative tools as a key game mechanic (Populous, Sim City, Theme Park etc)--the main thing that was lacking from these titles at the time was an easy way to share your creations with other people--which is where we have really gone to town in LittleBigPlanet.

The best thing about it is that you don’t have to create a single pixel to enjoy the experience--in the same way that you can enjoy websites like YouTube as a consumer of content, as well as a creator--just load it up, explore, and maybe, just maybe, get inspired to add your own creation into the mix. The cycle of people creating, and others playing, was something we were sure could translate into a console experience.

Based on your research and experiences, what are some of the factors that motivate people to create content and share it freely with others?

As mentioned before--YouTube is the perfect example--there are a lot of people out there, and a lot of creativity, add to this the fact that many people like to show off, others just like to have an audience or find likeminded people in the world and then provide a super easy way to share things, you’ve got a pretty hot mixture brewing. Another factor of course, for some people, is money--shared free content has been commonly used in many walks of life as a way to hook people in, get them addicted, and then start charging. When people ask us to define UGC (user-generated content), or what the audience for LBP might be, I always answer that anyone who has ever drawn on their school bag, or worn a pin on their lapel, or written a blog entry--all of these people are ‘creating’ in some sense, even if their motivations may be slightly different. LBP gives a unique chance to add interactivity to those ways that people can be creative, but taps into the same basic desire to express something.

Electronic Arts announced that within just a few days, 500,000 creatures have already been created using the Spore Creature Creator? Does this surprise you? Have you shifted your estimates on initial LittleBigPlanet based on this response?

To read the rest of our Q&A with Alex Evans, click on the link below. 

 Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter, posing in front of an Elvis impersonator

A couple of weeks ago, we wrote a piece for the "Global Literacy 2008" special edition of Newsweek magazine. In it, we argued that the Internet is the new sweatshop, by looking at properties ranging from YouTube to Spore that are being built on top of use-generated content. Since we could only use brief snippets of these email interviews in the print edition of Newsweek, we thought you might appreciate reading the game-related Q&As in their entirety. We heard first from Spore creator Will Wright; next up is Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter.

Electronic Arts announced that within just a few days, 500,000 creatures have already been created using the Spore Creature Creator. Then they said that they've hit a million Does this surprise you?

I'm not surprised at the number, it suggests around 100,000 users doing 10 apiece, which sounds about right. I heard from EA that [its CEO John] Riccitiello did 10, and he's clearly the target demographic ;-) Now, if we can find out how many Sam Houser created, that would be a story.

How do you factor user-generated content into your forecasts for games such as Spore, LittleBigPlanet, or even last year's Halo 3, with its built in photo mode and video uploader? What impact does this activity, nearly four months out from the launch, have on your forecasts for Spore. Have you shifted your initial estimates on LittleBigPlanet based on the response to Spore?

I think UGC (user-generated content) in this context is more like viral marketing, unlike UGC in World of Warcraft or even Halo, which comes after the fact. I expect around 3 million units of Spore to ship, so 100,000 users the first week of Creature Creator isn't really all that meaningful or unexpected. I saw ads on gaming websites, but this game has greater mass appeal (like the Sims), and mass market advertising will be more impactful than viral marketing.

Executives at Electronic Arts have suggested that they may exploit this user-generated content in a variety of ways, from toys to card-based games. Should users be somehow compensated if their "work" is used in this manner? Do publishers have any legal exposure if they don't compensate their users?

To read the rest of our Q&A with Michael Pachter, click on the link below.