Gamers at Work is the forthcoming book by Morgan Ramsay, founder of Entertainment Media Council. The book explores the challenges of startups through dozens of interviews with the world’s most successful entrepreneurs in the video game industry, including Electronic Arts founder Trip Hawkins, Atari cofounder Nolan Bushnell, and Naughty Dog cofounder Jason Rubin.

At Lionhead Studios, which was acquired by Microsoft in 2006, Molyneux was instrumental in the creation of the Black & White and Fable franchises. He previously cofounded Bullfrog Productions where he pioneered god games such as Populous and Dungeon Keeper.

Molyneux is one of the most recognized creators of video games. During the 2011 Game Developers Conference (GDC), Molyneux will receive the Lifetime Achievement Award at the Game Developers Choice Awards on Wednesday. He will also be welcomed with a British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) Fellowship at the 2011 GAME British Academy Video Games Awards. In 2004, he was inducted into the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences (AIAS) Hall of Fame, and appointed Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. In addition, Molyneux was appointed Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et Des Lettres by the government of France in 2007.

Learn more about Gamers at Work at www.emcouncil.org/GamersAtWork. Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble, Borders, and the publisher Apress are currently accepting preorders.

We “are very comfortable moving the discussion towards how we make connected gameplay—be it cooperative or multiplayer or online services—as opposed to fire-and-forget, packaged-goods-only, single-player, 25-hours-and-you’re-out. I think that model is finished. Online is where the innovation, and the action, is at.”

As expected, the mere hint that what consumers think of as single-player games are on their way out has sparked a few fires. Gibeau’s detractors wrongly assume that he has declared story mode an endangered species. In fact, he said nothing of the sort. Gibeau asserted that the publisher’s interest in “offline” games is fading, and that connectivity will play an even more significant role in the future of the business of video games.

Forewarned Is Forearmed

Gibeau was not the first to arrive at this conclusion. He was also not the first to be misunderstood. Sony Online Entertainment CCO Raph Koster (now Metaplace cofounder and Playdom VP) made waves in 2006 when he suggested during a panel discussion:

“The entire video game industry’s history thus far has been an aberration. [...] The single-player game is a strange mutant monster which has only existed for 21 years and is about to go away because it is unnatural and abnormal.”

Two years later, Atari president Phil Harrison (now general partner at London Venture Partners) echoed the same thought and was received just as poorly:

“I just don’t think consumers want to be playing games that don’t have some kind of network connectivity to them, or some kind of community embedded in them, or some kind of extension available through downloadable content.”

In my upcoming book Gamers at Work, EA founder Trip Hawkins reflected on social games and Digital Chocolate’s success with virtual goods, a form of connected gameplay:

“Games are going mainstream, so it is only natural that the business model would become less like a theatrical film and converge towards TV and the web. [...] The game industry will have to migrate more to what will work better in the future.”

What We Can Expect

Setting aside the challenges of communicating this message, here’s what we can expect going forward as entrepreneurs, C-level executives, and senior managers. Connectivity is a key component of corporate strategy at every major publisher.

Video games whose feature sets include online, such as achievements, leaderboards, downloadable content, social networking, and multiplayer gameplay, can expect to receive either preference or greater investment. Currently, publishers may not require that new title submissions include online features; however, as publishers invest more heavily in connectivity, there may come a time when that will change, which may not be very far off.

In addition, the console market is largely controlled by the video game industry’s big three, Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft; and the catalogue of products available to the respective platforms is dominated by titles produced by the majors. Platform owners can be expected to invest in more and new online capabilities while publishers can be expected to encourage console properties to take advantage of those capabilities. With retail continuing to play an important role as a distribution channel for developers, and with retailers continuing to focus on consoles, connectivity is shaping up to have serious momentum.

Furthermore, movement toward the ubiquity of connectivity may also indicate that top-tier publishers are leaving behind the “unconnected” video games space, not because of diminishing demand but simply because they are betting that connectivity is far more valuable to extending franchise life cycles and offers more opportunities for monetization. There may eventually be money on the table for mid-tier publishers, startups, and other companies deigning to serve those who are rapidly becoming a niche market.

Theory and Research

Two hypotheses are central to the theory and ongoing research about the psychological effects of video games on society: such entertainment media, especially of the violent and sexual sort, are either helpful or harmful to children, adolescents, and other players.

Video games are “exercises for our brains” that facilitate the practice of skills and assimilation of knowledge integral to unconscious living, such as pattern recognition and spatiotemporal reasoning.¹³ Behavioral nutrition researchers developed video games that modelled “asking, negotiation, and decision-making skills” whose exercise increased consumption of healthier foods and physical activity.⁹ In addition, video games enable players “to experiment in safe, nonthreatening environments, and to expand, explore, and reflect on different aspects of themselves.”⁴

Despite these benefits, exposure of children to violent video games has “substantial short-term effects on arousal, thoughts, and emotions, increasing the likelihood of aggressive [...] behavior”; however, evidence of long-term impact weakens with regard to older children, adolescents, and adults, as well as with regard to correlations between exposure and actual crime.³ Although aggressive behaviors are deeply embedded in video-game culture, “overt psychopathology” has not been exhibited by most players. Such psychopathology has been more frequently observed of children and adolescents who are predisposed to violence because of preexisting conditions or previous experiences.¹⁰

Sexual imagery in video games can also be significantly impactful, especially in shaping gender roles and identities. Many video games portray men and women in such a “characteristically stereotypical” manner that “girls may expect that they will continue to be victims and needy and that their responsibilities include maintaining beauty and sexual appeal while boys may determine that their role is to protect and defend women and to possessive them even through the use of violence.”⁵ Reinforcing these portrayals through play can “adversely affect the ability of women to ever attain gender equality with men” and hinder “male-female interaction” within mainstream society.⁵

Public Policy and Controversy

Science can be used to identify policy issues and to strengthen policy decisions; however, science alone “does not and cannot automatically translate into appropriate and effective public policy.” Formulation of effective public policy is affected by four factors: scientific evidence, legal issues, political realities, and personal values.¹ Controversy about the effects of violent video games has focused on these questions: is there sufficient and credible evidence? Are proposed policies constitutional? How likely are policies to receive legislative support? Which policies will voters support?¹¹

Regardless of general agreement within the scientific community that exposure to violent content in video games increases aggression and violence, the conduct of prior research has been criticized. Anderson notes that there are “gaps” in the literature, highlighting that there are few correlational and longitudinal studies.¹ Others suggest that many researchers assume video games are interchangeable and fail to account for how the differences affect players.¹⁴ Whatever the case, current theory and research is divergent and inconclusive.

In the United States, legislators have twelve times attempted to enact laws restricting the sale of violent video games—each law was found unconstitutional.¹² Therier determined that “video games are speech and are protected by the First Amendment; any attempt to regulate video games will be subjected to ‘strict scrutiny’ (the highest degree of First Amendment scrutiny) by the courts; the criminal penalties contained in these legislative measures would likely have a ‘chilling effect’ on video game expression; the ambiguity of various terms found in these measures (especially ‘harm to minors’) result in them being unconstitutionally vague; and the link between video games and aggressive behavior, or other forms of ‘harm to minors,’ has not been proven scientifically.”¹⁵ However, several similar laws have been enacted, but such laws are narrower and tend to restrict the sale of sexually explicit, or pornographic, video games to minors.²

Political realities and personal values are closely intertwined where video game violence is concerned. In psychology, aggression is a precise term that refers to any behavior that demonstrates a malicious intent to cause harm. Aggression is divided into three categories: physical aggression, or the methods intended to cause bodily harm and which is measured along a mild-to-violent severity continuum; verbal aggression, or offensive statements of the spoken and written varieties; and relational aggression, or the threat of damage “to relationships or to feelings of acceptance, friendship, or group inclusion.”¹

However, the public “tends to use the word [...] in a broader way than aggression researchers” and these “differences in usage lead to much confusion between aggression scientists, public policymakers, and the general public.” Moreover, the public tends to be primarily concerned with the graphically explicit nature of violent content whereas researchers focus on risk of harm.¹¹ Policymakers and politicians have often made decisions based on this confusion, motivated by the wrongly held belief that scientific evidence has proved that, in the words of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, “video games have ever caused anyone to commit a violent act, as opposed to feeling aggressive, or have caused the average level of violence to increase anywhere.”⁶

Looking Forward

Over 200 million Americans play video games. Nearly half of players are women. 84% of video games are rated family-friendly while 16% of video games feature mature content. The 40-year old interactive entertainment market is a multibillion-dollar business with overall hardware, software, and peripheral sales at $22 billion dollars in 2008.⁷ There is no question that video games have an enormous impact on society. Sex and violence in video games, even if eventually considered not sufficiently harmful to warrant regulation, have spurred controversy and, with that controversy, increasing mainstream awareness of, and debate about, video games as art, media, and technology — as an agent of socialization — and their role in the advancement and shaping of human society.

References

1. Anderson, C. (2006). Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Adolescents: Theory, Research, and Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Barret, G. (2008). Legislation on Video Game Violence (OLR Research Report 2008-R-0233). Hartford, CT: Connecticut General Assembly. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0233.htm
3. Browne, K., & Hamilton-Giachritsis, C. (2005). The Influence of Violent Media on Children and Adolescents: A Public-Health Approach. The Lancet, 365(9460), 702-10.
4. Dickey, M. (2005). Engaging by Design: How Engagement Strategies in Popular Computer andVideo Games Can Inform Instructional Design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 67-83.
5. Dietz, T. (1998). An Examination of Violence and Gender Role Portrayals in Video Games: Implications for Gender Socialization and Aggressive Behavior. Sex Roles, 38(5/6), 425-42.
6. Entertainment Software Association. (2009). Essential Facts About Video Games and Court Rulings. Washington, DC: Entertainment Software Association. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://www.theesa.com/policy/legalissues.asp
7. Entertainment Software Association. (2009). Industry Facts. Washington, DC: Entertainment Software Association. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://www.theesa.com/facts
8. Fling, S. (1992). Videogames, Aggression, and Self-Esteem: A Survey. Social Behavior and Personality, 20(1), 39-46.
9. Flores, A. (2006). Using Computer Games and Other Media to Decrease Child Obesity. Agricultural Research, 54(3), 8-9.
10. Funk, J., Hagan, J., Schimming, J., Bullock, W., Buchman, D., & Myers, M. (2002). Aggression and Psychopathology in Adolescents with a Preference for Violent Electronic Games. Aggressive Behavior, 28(5), 134-44.
11. Gentile, D., Saleem, M., & Anderson, C. (2007). Public Policy and the Effects of Media Violence on Children. Social Issues and Policy Review, 1(1), 15-61.
12. Graft, K. (2009, May 21). California Seeks To Uphold Violent Game Law. Gamasutra. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23709
13. Koster, R. (2004). A Theory of Fun for Game Design. Scottsdale: Paraglyph Press.
14. Lavigne, C. (2009, May 25). Why Video Game Research Is Flawed. Maisonneuve. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://www.maisonneuve.org/pressroom/article/2009/may/25/why-video-game-research-is-flawed/
15. Therier, A. (2006, March 7). Fact and Fiction in the Debate Over Video Game Regulation. Progress on Point, 13, 1-30.

[This is an edited version of the original 2009 paper.]

Sales of video games, hardware, and accessories reach upwards of $20 billion every year in the United States alone. More than two-thirds of American households include video games in their daily lives. In a world that seems overflowing with fortune and opportunity, the vicious truth of this booming industry is easily forgotten: while there are a few businesses that have stood the test of time, most startups exit as quickly as they enter.

Gamers at Work, the groundbreaking third book in the bestselling At Work series from Apress, will offer exclusive, behind-the-scenes accounts of the world’s most successful and memorable video game companies. Innovators, business leaders, and industry pioneers will reflect on the challenges, how they survived, and what startups can do to prosper. Over 30 direct and unfiltered interviews are planned to appear in the anthology, including:

• Trip Hawkins, founder of Electronic Arts;
• Nolan Bushnell, cofounder of Atari;
• Tony Goodman, cofounder of Ensemble Studios;
• Christopher Weaver, founder of Bethesda Softworks;
• Ken Williams, cofounder of Sierra On-Line;
• Cory Ondrejka, cofounder of Linden Lab;
• Warren Spector, founder of Junction Point Studios;
• Doug and Gary Carlston, cofounders of Brøderbund Software;
• Feargus Urquhart, cofounder of Obsidian Entertainment;
• David Perry, founder of Shiny Entertainment;
• Lorne Lanning, cofounder of Oddworld Inhabitants;
• and Raph Koster, cofounder of Metaplace.

Gamers at Work is slated to be available in stores by February 2011. Additional details, such as the complete table of contents and preorder information, will be disclosed by Apress at a later date. For more information about Apress, visit www.apress.com

For more information about Entertainment Media Council, visit www.emcouncil.org

Games-on-demand services are platform-agnostic distribution systems. These services promise to play a key role in the future of marketing video games. Producers will be able to deliver media to any web-enabled device without the usual constraints, and disparate titles that have never been in direct competition will occupy the same virtual shelf space.

Greg asked, “Why would you play FarmVille when you can play World of Warcraft on the same machine?” Metaplace cofounder Raph Koster responded on his blog, “A huge part of the audience that likes social games doesn’t like World of Warcraft. I know this is shocking and bizarre to hear, so let me reiterate it. They don’t like the games you do.”

While there are separate markets for these different products, why are they separate? Monopoly is a board game. Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune is a PlayStation game. FarmVille is a Facebook game. The markets for games have traditionally been defined by the platforms on which games are first and primarily available.

By definition, platform exclusivity limits who is exposed to platform-dependent games. When barriers to consumption have long-defined the markets for games, the “different strokes for different folks” argument is easily made. After all, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, right? But what happens when the platform doesn’t matter anymore?

Gaikai has already demonstrated that World of Warcraft can be played on Facebook.

What happens when all of the barriers to consumption, which have informed our present-day understanding of the marketplace, are eliminated? We’re in for a fun ride. Conventional wisdom will be challenged. Consumers will have more options. And I think we’ll see more opportunities, more competition, and more product categories.

I don’t think games on demand will kill social games. Social games will stick around; however, when we can choose to play Red Dead Redemption or My Vineyard on the iPad, social games will probably not be seen the same way. Nor will anything else.

Founded in 2008, Entertainment Media Council serves business decision-makers—such as entrepreneurs, C-level executives, and senior managers—who own or lead companies in every category throughout the interactive entertainment supply chain.

“Entertainment Media Council exists to transform the way the game is played and advance the industry to the next level,” according to founder Morgan Ramsay. “The path we have chosen is difficult, but the rewards will be great. We are seeking Charter Members, businesses whose leaders believe in our mission, to help us forward.”

For their commitment, Charter Members will receive lifetime recognition and honorary lifetime memberships for key personnel. Charter Members will be responsible for empowering the association and, by extension, the industry as a whole to:

• increase the success rate of new firms;
• stabilize the business landscape;
• explore and create new business models;
• reduce unnecessary and wasteful layoffs;
• and effect other significant changes.

Interested parties are encouraged to visit the official website, www.emcouncil.org, which has been expanded with more information about Entertainment Media Council, the board of directors and advisory group, and the value of individual and charter membership.

SAN DIEGO (April 13, 2009) — Entertainment Media Council was announced today as the new interactive entertainment association for entrepreneurs and corporate leaders. Entertainment Media Council is pursuing a broad agenda for advancing the interactive entertainment business in the United States.

“With interactive entertainment in the midst of a sea change, the need for a navigator is more pronounced than ever,” said Morgan Ramsay, president and chief executive officer at Entertainment Media Council. “We are embarking on a mission to solve the most challenging problems facing the industry today.”

Entertainment Media Council will harness the collective intelligence of an inclusive assembly of entrepreneurs and corporate leaders to support and focus on entrepreneurship, organizational innovation, social responsibility, environmental sustainability, professional diversity, and globalization.

Joining Ramsay on the founding board of directors are Cindy Armstrong, chief executive officer at WebWars, Inc., and Matthew J. Esber, general counsel at NCsoft. Forming the advisory group are: Adam McClard, Alexander Macris, Brandon Sheffield, David Cole, Geoffrey Zatkin, S. Gregory Boyd, Steve Crane, and Terri Perkins. Efforts are underway to fill the remaining seats on the board of directors.

For more information about Entertainment Media Council, visit www.emcouncil.org