Xbox 720: What We Know

How times have changed. Only ten years ago, Microsoft was a relative newcomer to the gaming division. Despite dominating the home computer market since DOOM was finally ported to Windows in 1995, for a number of years there was a noticeable lack of Microsoft productivity with regards to gaming in general, and more specifically, the console market itself. Let's face it, besides Flight Simulator and Age Of Empires, how many established IPs did they really have? For this reason, many people, critics and consumers alike, doomed the console to fail before it had even hit the market. Although, in retrospect, such criticisms seem both groundless and unsubstantiated, in 2001 it was a different story.

Whereas Nintendo and Sega had extensive experience in the arcade industry and Sony were an opposing figure within the electronics industry, Microsoft was an outsider in both departments. As Joseph Lampell accurately observes in The business of culture: strategic perspectives on entertainment and media, initially the Xbox "seemed a strange fit with Microsoft's portfolio and competencies, which had historically focused almost exclusively on packaged and licensed computer software." Nevertheless, this didn't stop the computer giant from taking its best shot. With an originally proposed budget of $500 million, the operating system maestro showed right from the get go that it meant business, and nowhere was this more efficacious than with its original mission statement:

"Microsoft is not concerned with its status as a 'newcomer' to the games console industry. There are always opportunities for new leaders to emerge, and the company recognizes that the video game business is all about the games. From Atari to Nintendo to Sega to PlayStation, it has historically been shown again and again that gamers are loyal to the games -- not to the hardware."

With an opening pitch as bold and provocative as this, Ed Fries and J Allard not only rectified, but ultimately vindicated their foray into the home console market. This wasn't, as many suspected, a coup d'état by a global computing goliath to crush, monopolise and bend the business to its will. Instead, it was not only unapologetic, but remarkably humble. Putting games at the forefront by acquiring such prolific developers as Bungie, Ensemble Studios and Rareware, who were assigned to develop exclusively for them, only strengthened their case.

In spite of such a strong entrance to a notoriously difficult market to gain ground in, Xbox sales were, to put it lightly, unexemplary. Whilst the console sold in excess of 24 million units, compared with the runaway success of the PS2 with over 153 million units and an estimated 1.52 billion games sold, it really puts it in perspective. To add insult to injury, as Business Week reported in issue 3760, Microsoft lost between $100 and $125 on every console sold during this period. In fact, during the entire lifespan of the original Xbox, it only had one quarter within which it ran at a profit, which was, rather unpredictably, Q4 2004; the same quarter, which avid gamers will be quick to point out, that Halo 2 was released in.

With such a dismal financial performance, it must have been overwhelming perplexing for Microsoft to continue running at a loss, but as Chris Lewis, Microsoft's Vice President of Interactive Entertainment in Europe puts it in a recent interview with Edge; "we were in [it] for the long term... it was a marathon, not a sprint." Such a sentiment projects both a remarkable sense of foresight and an amplified understanding not only of the market itself but the designated target demographic as well.

Credit where credit is due. Despite their role as the foremost authority on all things unscrupulous and their discernable responsibility as the world's most recognised malevolent conglomeration, their approach to the home console industry was something of a mitigation. Everything that was expected of them was either downplayed or extinguished. Rather than use arguably the most established brand in the world, they chose to forge a different path, instead concentrating on setting the system up on its own accord. Rather than Bill Gates himself personally taking the stabilisers from the wheels of the Xbox, instead the system was allowed some breathing space and, as a result, it managed to gain momentum from its own achievements.

I know what you're thinking. Wasn't the original Xbox on the verge of being taken off shelves due to a lack of sales? You'd be right, and yes, Microsoft waved an unspecified amount of cash in front of retailers to keep them on board but this is hardly unexpected. Bear in mind that just over six months previously, one of the biggest hardware manufacturers of the past two decades had just ceased operating as a hardware pioneer. On top of this, at this point in time there was somewhat of a level of distrust for Western manufacturers. After all, the big hitters had been Eastern orientated since the video game crash of 1983, and to add to this, Microsoft had a shady history involving monopolistic business practices and anti-competitive strategies.

Part fact, part generalisation, this undercurrent of doubt superseded almost every area of competitors business strategies from this point onwards. This was particularly exemplified during Sega's auction of exclusivity for their most lucrative IPs. Already concerned with Microsoft's recent studio acquisitions, those in the hardware industry's internal Doomsday Clock's drew closer and closer to midnight, as the seemingly unstoppable Microsoft continued to gain footing in all the right places.

Shenmue, Panzer Dragoon, OutRun, Jet Set Radio and House Of The Dead are just a small number of established brands which were originally exclusive to the first Xbox. What's most interesting about these titles is that they're not exactly obvious choices. Most of which are generally considered to be cult masterpieces but none of them scream system seller. Shenmue, especially, was a commercial disaster. While it reportedly had a $70 million budget, Yu Suzuki dispelled this embellishment at the Game Developers Conference in 2011, setting the record straight that the actuality of its development budget was closer to $47 million. Even so, the game was almost destined to fail from the outset due to the fact that it would have had to be purchased twice by every Dreamcast owner for Sega to achieve a profit. With this information readily at their disposal, its surprising, considering the amount of money they were losing at this point, that Microsoft would back such an unreliable candidate.

The answer, perhaps, can be found by rewinding to their original mission statement, and distinguishably, a certain line within it: "gamers are loyal to the gamers - not the hardware." Out of context, this may sound contradictory, but let's not forget that the Xbox already had its 'killer app' with Halo, so picking up the rights to cult fan favourites may have not made the most financial sense, but it still got a percentage of the 'hardcore' on board. Even this early on, Microsoft demonstrated on a multitude of levels an understanding not often associated with console start-up companies, which was solidified through some of their more prophetic proclamations.

One such declaration was, when speaking of the original Xbox, that "it's the only console designed from the ground up to be perfect for broadband online gaming. And that is the future of gaming." No matter how against Microsoft's corporate policies you may be, its difficult to deny just how unmatched their online infrastructure is. We're at a point where Xbox Live is head and shoulders above the competition on every level, and, let's face it, online will be a contributing factor in how successful the next generation systems are going to be. According to 'insider sources', Nintendo have finally decided that they don't have the experience or relevant qualifications to run and maintain an effective online foundation and have instead been selling themselves to the highest bidder. Valve have shown a keen interest, but it's EA, with their Origin digital distribution platform who are "aggressively" pursuing it.

Microsoft have said in the past that they've no interest in launching a system until the 360's ten year lifecycle has came to a conclusion, however, what must be pointed out is that the '720' can still launch at any time between 2012-2014 whilst still adhering to their original ideology. In most scenarios, when a new system launches, the previous system is still supported by a limited number of developers. For instance, even in 2011, there are still games being released for the PS2. Granted, these are few and far between, but the fact that the system hasn't been completely abandoned yet demonstrates that Microsoft can still stick to their original claim while launching a new system within the same window.

According to one source, who apparently has knowledge of Microsoft's plans within its Entertainment and Devices Division, the successor to the 360 has been in development since 2006, while other sources have also went on record to state that the system has been in the planning phase since as far back as the year the 360 launched - 2005. To add fuel to the fire, Microsoft have advertised new job vacancies including a Graphics Hardware Architect and a Performance Engineer, both directly associated with the Xbox Console Architecture Group, whose roles revolve around being “responsible for defining and delivering next generation console architectures from conception through implementation." With the Wii U launch just around the corner and Sony keeping their cards close to their chest, you'd have to be pretty naive to think Microsoft don't have a trick or two up their proverbial sleeves. According to an anonymous Develop source, “Kinect will keep the 360 going for a couple of years, but Microsoft knows that if it slows down now it will face trouble.”

Such concerns unquestionably factor into how unremitting the rumours are involving developers and exactly what type of architecture they do or do not have in their possession, depending on who you ask. According to the Insider column of Xbox World, a number of "Microsoft-friendly developers are hard at work prepping next-gen games," including Volition, THQ, who are already in the planning stages for a next-gen Saints Row 4, Lionhead and Turn 10, who are working on launch titles, Rareware, who are prototyping a 'mature' title and Epic, who are supposedly attempting to launch Gears Of War 4 on the system during the launch period.

Develop's “senior, trusted, well-placed” source has also placed EA in the firing line, claiming that they've had development kits since as far back as Q2 2011, and perhaps even further. Naturally, EA have denied all accusations, with corporate spokesman Jeff Brown telling Industry Gamers, “this story is a total fabrication – 100 percent not true.” Nonetheless, despite such stringent denials, the source has remained unfazed, insisting that the publisher “has rudimentary Xbox console technology on desks.”

What exactly is 'rudimentary technology' though? “Quite often when new consoles come around they’re packaged into a PC shell, but actually what’s inside is an entirely new console,” the Develop source elaborates. For example, the archetypal Xbox 360 development kits were based on Dual Core G5 PowerPC Mac technology, which contained an ATIX800 CPU, whereas the PS3 development kits were based around a PC setup with two GeForce 6800 Ultras running in SLI.

Another significant developer directly interlinked with the 720 is Crytek, who are rumoured to be running DirectX 11 as a basis for next-generation development. VideoGamer.com have claimed to be in contact with a high-ranking Crytek source, who has stated that TimeSplitters 4 is in development and is scheduled to launch with the machine. Keen gamers will recall that the PlayStation 2 launched with the original TimeSplitters, which should lend credence to this admission. Development duties have been assigned to Crytek UK, formerly known as Free Radical, the developers behind the first three titles of the franchise. Most intriguingly, the game has been built from the ground up with CryEngine 3 and has allegedly already been shown in private video form at this year's E3.

The same source claims that the visuals on display within TimeSplitters 4 are a noticeable improvement over this generation's graphical capabilities, with Directx 11 tessellation effects purportedly giving visuals a huge boost. Because, according to the source, this information is coming directly from Crytek, who have been setting the graphics benchmark since the launch of Far Cry in 2004, gamers should stand to attention. Supposedly, the studio believes that both the game and the engine itself will be seen as the cornerstone of next-gen development, and reportedly, tessellation, multithreaded rendering, and compute shaders are the three headlining features for DirectX 11.

The previously mentioned Develop source has also elaborated that they believe that the next Unreal Engine will land sooner than the estimated 2014 date conveyed by Epic Games studio founder Tim Sweeney in September. On a slightly unrelated note, Sweeney has went on record to insist that "AI has always been the real battleground." In a recent interview with GamesIndustry.biz, he commented that "in general the industry expects that graphics will not be a strong feature any more... Obviously, graphics are better for marketing purposes because you can show things. AI you can't show."

He continues; “the other area is simulation of human aspects of the game experience, simulation of gameplay characters, artificial intelligence, character dialogue and all of these other things which aren’t really problems of brute force computing. They require increasingly sophisticated algorithms and simulation of human intelligence." Judging by the leaked specifications of the 720, even though they may not be 100% correct, if they're even close to what has been suggested - a hex-code CPU with 2gb on board DDR3 ram and a graphics chip provided by AMD - then Microsoft's new system should be more than capable of handling any and all AI needs.

Acording to Xboxygen, a team going by the name of Loop are handling software development, whilst a team by the name of Infinity are working on the console itself. Of course, such information comes from a source 'very close' to the company, however, they did put forward a date for the system launch - the end of 2012 - although the source admitted that this wasn't set in stone. Right now, two different events are being bounced around as the official announcement conference; CES and E3. Naturally, E3 seems like the obvious choice, considering it is widely touted as the gaming equivalent of the Oscars, in terms of importance, but CES is an equally likely candidate.

Founded in 1967, in spite of its lack of consumer notability, it has traditionally served as a vehicle of demonstration for a number of new products and product formats. Some of the more significant announcements revolving around the latter include CD, Blu-Ray, HDTV, VCR and DVD. From a gaming viewpoint, other consequential divulgences include the unveiling of the NES, Tetris, the C64 and the original Xbox. While the source has admitted that the public should not expect a "huge announcement" with software, they added that there should be "some information on the new console, and some of its capabilities."

In terms of the consoles capabilities, EEDAR analyst Jesse Divnich believes that the era of digital downloads is still blossoming and, as a result, consumers won't be forced into the digital market by hardware manufacturers, despite the profitability of the format. "The digital transition will be just that, a transition," he told Industry Gamers, continuing that "the digital transition will ultimately be at the choice of the consumer and Microsoft and Sony will continue to support physical media until the mass market has reached the tipping point of acceptance on digital."

Divnich then confirmed that in spite of the popularity of digital download titles, their sales account for a mere 10% of console software revenue, which means that, in terms of production, "it would be inefficient for either manufacturer to accelerate [it] to 100% through a cloud or digital only environment." He continues by observing that, in the online subdivision, "Microsoft is already the market leader and it would be detrimental to their current success if they hit the reset button and forced consumers into an experience they may not be ready for."

He believes the 720 will be a "true hybrid console, supporting both physical and digital media with the long-term hopes that they can provide enough incentive and value to accelerate that transition," but when will this hybrid launch? Speaking with Kotaku, various confidential sources claim that the aforementioned 2012 date is a product of misinformation. They believe that Microsoft will release a different, Kinect-upgraded 360 SKU as opposed to the 720. Supposedly, they're “wrestling with whether to be profitable on day one,” or launch a new console at a loss as per industry standard.

Jesse Divinich agrees: "the Xbox 360 has incredible momentum and it would baffle me as to why they would make a new hardware announcement at E3 and announce its launch by the end of 2012." David Cole of DFC Intelligence concurs, stating that a 2012-2013 release date is unlikely, but he doesn't rule out the possibility of a hardware tease, confirming "the issue is the ongoing competition and the need to ensure consumers that you have something cool in the pipeline." The specific reasoning for this lack of definitive confirmation is unclear, but veteran Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter believes that the economy is a contributing factor: “I don’t think either Sony or Microsoft are interested in a new console till they can advance the technology, and they certainly don’t want to launch at a $600 price point."

Given exactly how successful Sony's high end, big budget PlayStation 3 campaign has been, he raises a valid point, though don't rule out an earlier-than-expected launch window. The 2005 release of the Xbox 360 took the world by surprise, and according to certain sources, Microsoft feels 'pressured' into an early release due to Nintendo's 2012 release window of Project Café. In all likelihood, the 720 will launch within the next two years. History has shown that the last console out the door usually fares the worst for a variety of reasons. Any later than 2013-14 and Microsoft risk not only losing potential customers, but also part of their established userbase. This generation has already surprassed virtually every generation that has came before it in terms of lastability, therefore whether or not details of 'next-gen' systems start trickling out is irrelevant, because at this stage of the game, they're guaranteed. Add to this that the hardware used to power this generation is woefully out of date and its practically certified that we'll be hearing rumblings sometime in the near future.

Deception

A teaser for a long over due Halo: Reach beta montage edited by myself and brought to you by CGN with music supervision by The Bast*rds of Bass, full release to follow shortly.



Stay fresh.

How One Game Transformed An Industry

Ten years ago, an entertainment milestone was hit. Although it seems like only yesterday, Grand Theft Auto III's tenth birthday is this weekend, so we decided to look at the history of one of the most important technical landmarks of the last decade.

At this point in time, you'd be hard pressed to come across a member of the public who hasn't heard of Grand Theft Auto. As well known for its groundbreaking innovation as its embroilment in controversy, the franchise is as critically lauded as it is publicly denounced.

Described as "sick, deluded and beneath contempt" by the Police Federation, banned in Australia and the catacylst behind Joe Baca implementing the Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act of 2002, the franchise has made many enemies in its 14 year life cycle.

Within the industry, its a different story. Tim Ingham, the online editor of industry trade magazine MCV belives that the series contains "hours upon hours of the most immersive and interactive entertainment ever seen" and he's not far off. As most of you no doubt already know, the real strength of Grand Theft Auto lies in its open ended game design and it is this design philosophy which provides the real meat of the franchise.

Ask anyone who is familiar with any of the GTA titles how they spend the majority of their time in-game, and chances are, they'll have spent innumerable hours exploring the rich and detailed worlds Rockstar have painstakingly put together.

It wasn't always this open ended, however. Although the latter games have gotten bigger and bigger with every installment, it was once a more contained environment. The Sandbox structure was still there, it just wasn't as grand in scale as latter editions. Back in 1997, the blueprint was constructed on a considerably smaller scale.

The release of the original Grand Theft Auto on the PC ushered in a new era in video games. Sure, it wasn't the best looking title on the market, it had some of the worst loading times yet seen and it wasn't even the father of controversy (check out Mystique's output in the early 80s), at the same time, it had what so many other mindlessly gratuitous games lacked, charm.

Whether we're talking about the endlessly creative radio stations, the veritable originality of the missions or even the sound effect the Elvis impersonators made when you ran them over, it was leaps and bounds ahead of the competition on almost every level and the fact that it didn't leave the UK Top 20 videogame charts for two years says it all.

The next two games, while not exactly setting the world on fire, did a good job changing the process up just enough to keep consumers interested. The expansion, London, took the original concept and gave it a visual and audio makeover; introducing London as the playable environment, complete with maps based on reality. The first true sequel, GTA II, took the tried and tested formula and added an aggregation of gangs, vehicles and opposition - in the forms of the FBI and SWAT teams. Although it wasn't as well received as its predecessors, it was still a worthy addition to the series.

It was at this point that there was a sudden change in inertia within the Rockstar infastructure, as although Grand Theft Auto had been their baby since day one, their development duties on the PS2 were focused on similar but ultimately inferior titles such as Smuggler's Run and Midnight Club, followed by the frightfully broken Oni.

Although any trace of Grand Theft Auto had mysteriously vanished, the games released within this period had unmistakable similarities to their forefather. Smuggling? Check. Guns? Check. Breaking the law? Check. It's no secret that companies have a tendency to tread the water, so to speak, before dipping in.

What we mean by this is that with every new generation of hardware comes new development obstacles. Everything down from the processor of the console to the platform of the development kits plays a contributing factor. In this scenario, the biggest hurdle of all, the transition from 2D to 3D needed to be made, and rather than release a GTA title before they'd mastered the hardware, instead Rockstar chose to take the new IP route and experiment with material not already in public circulation, to mixed results.

Recently speaking about Grand Theft Auto III, Rockstar founder and GTA co-creator Dan Houser explained that "the key idea of the game was that it wasn't about violence; it was about freedom." He continues, "We thought that was something that games did very well, the idea that you're turning a viewer into an active participant. So give them the freedom of choice over what they do."

It is this sentiment which has proceeded each installment of every Grand Theft Auto, but none moreso than GTA III, because whilst previous games had given you the opportunity to explore this virtual Sandbox, the third title in the series gave you the opportunity to live in it. Aside from obvious next generation benefits such as extraordinarily detailed environments (for the time) and believable A.I, even simple things like the around the clock radio stations helped immerse the player in Rockstar's living, breathing microcosm.

The protagonist of the game, Claude, was one of the first to actively endorse the 'blank palette' characteristic which in recent times has become a staple of the industry. Whilst its storyline isn't the strongest, as for the most part, it is a tale of revenge and retribution, there are enough colourful characters to keep it intriguing, particularly Catalina, the main antagonist.

Like most Grand Theft Auto's, the admittedly revolutionary non-linear story progression takes a backseat to the open world environments and freedom of choice gameplay mechanics. When gamers these days think of freedom of choice, they think of games where their characters make predetermined, often dialog driven choices which fit into a specific path in which the player is given an ending which ties in with the decisions they've made.

As a writer for Game Informer points out, "the environments of Liberty City are stunning in scope and detail, dwarfing anything I've ever seen, and your choices are endless." In this scenario, your choices are not delivered via any pre-existing context, but rather the choice is left up to the player. Do you want to beat a prostitute to death with a baseball bat in broad daylight, wait for the cavalry to arrive and then blow up a police car with a rocket launcher? It's possible. Anything is possible, and this is where the endless levels of choice both begin and end.

There is no doubt the game's emphasis on choice is a contributing factor to exactly why so many dubious court cases started popping up all over the place after 2001, but we're sure it didn't help that the game's widespread success crossed over to the mainstream.

What opponents of the game consistently fail to realise, however, is that the whole crux of freedom of choice is that it puts the player at the forefront. Ultimately, the decisions they make are their own to make, therefore the game can't be held responsible for their own decisions. It doesn't train you to kill, contrary to what some lawyers would have you believe, it gives you the opportunity to do so if you're that way inclined.

One of the more well-known news articles relating to GTA III as a 'murder simulator' is the case of the families of Aaron Hamel and Kimberly Bede, who were tragically gunned down by two teens who attempted to claim Grand Theft Auto inspired their actions. On October 20th 2003, they filed a $246 million lawsuit against publishers Take-Two. Naturally, the court case was dismissed, particularly after Take-Two insisted that the "ideas and concepts as well as the 'purported psychological effects' on the Buckners are protected by the First Amendment's free-speech clause."

This is important because, up until this point, games that took a more realistically violent approach were persecuted against. Grand Theft Auto III came under just as much, if not more, scrutiny, yet Take-Two managed to not only overcome all opposition, but also to release not only the highest rated PS2 game but also the biggest selling title of 2001. It metamorphosed the industry from the basement dwelling, socially inept, teen stereotype that had been plaguing it for the last two decades, and kickstarted the more adult-friendly approach of the last decade.

It's easy to forget about just how much of an impact Grand Theft Auto III made when it was released in 2001. At this point, the Sandbox genre, as it is popularly known as today, didn't exist in the framework it exists in today. The likes of Saint's Row, Crackdown, InFamous, Prototype and every other open ended Sandbox title owe their existence to this title. Practically every game since has borrowed one thing or another from it, and as a result, there has been a transformation of sorts, both with regards to the environmental structure of the games themselves, as well as the public perception of the industry as a whole. With over 14.5 million units sold as of March 26th 2008, and a hell of a lot more still to come when its 10th Anniversary edition is released to the iOS and Android platforms, its influence it unlikely to be forgotten any time in the near future.

ZOMBIE NATION

This is how i roll.

The Rise And Fall Of Acclaim Entertainment

Believe it or not, Acclaim Entertainment, a company now synonomous with lizards and bad PR stunts, used to be an industry trendsetter. Not only were they a heavyweight contender in the developer division, but they also brought the likes of Mortal Kombat, Burnout, Dave Mirra's Freestyle BMX and Turok into our lives. Not bad for a company that has been defunct for seven years.

Although it was founded in 1987, Acclaim Entertainment didn't start out as the jack of all trades corporation we've came to familiarise ourselves with. It started small, publishing and localising titles, and with increased revenue came increased expenditure, leading to the acquisition of both Sculptured Software, mostly known for their solid porting and localisation work, and Probe Entertainment, makers of sleeper hits Die Hard Trilogy and Alien Trilogy.

As a consequence of the output of these newly acquired studios, crossed with Acclaim's own insistence on gaining the localisation and publishing rights to titles whose developers had no western publishing branch, such as Double Dragon 2 and Bust-A-Move, the company was able to solidify its position within the industry.

It was only in the mid-90s when we started to see a downworld spiral in what can only be described as their development allocation. It began with the Bart VS series. To those of you not old enough to remember the multiplatform shameful Simpsons licensing atrocities, count yourselves lucky. Some things are better left in the past.

Due to the frequency and volume of these Simpsons titles, with nine games being released between the period of 1991 and 1994, even at that time, it didn't take an industry analyst to figure out not only that the brand had hit saturation point, but that similarly, there was something amiss at Acclaim HQ. You see, it was also around this period that a little known series known as Mortal Kombat dropped into Acclaim's proverbial laps.

Mortal Kombat was something of a paradox in the arcades and because Acclaim and Midway had a long-standing working relationship, they got first dibs. Not only did they promote the game, but they did it with a bang, running non-stop promotions and advertisements, in what many pundits claim to be the first big, slashy product launch promo, demonstrating steadfast innovation at a time when Sega was still trying to capture the Generation X audience with its 'AGES' advertisements and Nintendo were scared to put blood in their games.

The fundamental problem with Mortal Kombat's success stems not from anything relating to Midway or Ed Boon's vision, but instead by just how polished the arcade title was (begin laugh track.... now). Taking only 6-8 months to port to consoles, Acclaim started to get a little notion that this was possible with all titles.

They tried the same tactic with Mortal Kombat 2, segregating Sculptured Software and Probe Entertainment to development duties on the two biggest ports, SNES and MegaDrive, and, what do you know, it was not only a success, but it smashed records and was deemed as a cultural phenomenon. With over $50 million cartridges sold in the first weekend, outselling the likes of True Lies and The Lion King at the box office, no one could deny its runaway commercial success.

In many regards, this can be considered the beginning of the end for Acclaim because although they continued operating for another decade, rather successfully I might add, this was the turning point in their business mantra. The rules had changed and so had Acclaim.

On 1st January 1995, Acclaim acquired NBA Jam developer Iguana Entertainment and began a new chapter of their history. By this point, the next generation was about to begin, with Sony's PlayStation and Nintendo's N64 about to go head to head in the public domain.

To usher in this new era, Iguana began developing a brand new IP for the N64 entitled Turok: Dinosaur Hunter. Having been given an early technical demonstration and being impressed with the talent of the studio, Nintendo of America began working with the team and later offered Acclaim into their 'Dream Team' collaborative effort, a scheme where partners with Nintendo would develop exclusive titles and receive technical and game support from the Big N in return. Naturally, despite its lack of analog support, Turok was a commercial smash, becoming one of the top selling launch titles.

Despite the success of Turok, however, it was at this point that Acclaim initiated their timed self-destruct mechanism. After a series of poorly received WWF licensed titles, Vince McMahon decided to take the license elsewhere, instead capitalising on the success of THQ's WCW titles. Although this was a significant blow at the time (bear in mind, this is the Attitude era we're talking about), it was by no means an insurmountable obstacle to Acclaim's rise to the top. Licenses are lost on a yearly basis, right? Well, yes and no. The loss of the brand itself was a deep, but recoverable wound, however, its Acclaim we're talking about. They're their own worst enemy.

Steve Perry is a name most of you will have been unaware of, but in spite of this factor, its also a name which is irrevocably intertwined with the self-destruction of Acclaim. During his tenure at the company as an executive, he rather infamously made some of the worst PR decisions in the history of the industry.

Oscar Wilde once said that "the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about," and if you really take the time out to think about it, he's bang on the money. The problem is that Steve Perry took the saying a little too to heart and made some morally unethical and frankly absurd promotion decisions, no doubt in some desperate attempt to return to the creative highs of the Mortal Kombat days.

Shadowman, a title with an intriguing premise fused with middle-of-the-road gameplay, was one of the first franchises to get the PR treatment. Although the game was unremarkable, the PR gamble with its sequel most certainly was not. Acclaim offered to pay for the funerals of the recently deceased if their relatives allowed them to plant a small billboard on the headstone advertising Shadowman: 2econd Coming. Understandably, mourners were furious, and the Church Of England issued a statement basically stating that there was no chance in hell (see what I did there?) they'd allow such activities within their grounds, which ultimately led to the campaign falling apart.

Not content with possibly the biggest misfire in gaming history, Acclaim went a step further, offering prospective parents $10,000 in US savings bonds to name their child 'Turok' for a year. If this wasn't bad enough, a 25 year-old gamer named Jason Read claimed he was planning on breaking the world record for the longest time spent standing in line. What was he waiting for? The shockingly abhorrent Turok: Evolution. Of course, by the time the papers had published the story the next day, he'd vanished.

These tactics are ofen referred to as 'guerrilla marketing,' wherein a product can be promoted via the attraction of attention, often in irregular circumstances. A foundational issue with this type of promotion, however, is that real creativity is not only a requirement, but its a necessity. In the words of Darren Paul, managing director of Night Agency, "the field of guerrilla marketing is similar to advertising. There’s good and bad marketing. There’s good and bad execution. And there are negative case studies of companies crossing the line.”

Acclaim was one such company. Unfortunately in the upper hierarchical structure, executives adopted their already fledging process of a 6-8 month development lifecycle and applied it to the PR department, resulting in ideas such as the aforementioned 'world record attempt' and their intention to install billboards which had seeping blood pouring out of them at bus shelters. In both scenarios, nothing transpired, almost certainly deliberately, but the product was out there and that's all that matters (in Steve Perry and his corporate lackeys minds anyway).

You'd think that with the success of Dave Mirra's Freestyle BMX, Acclaim would find some way not to fuck it up. Wrong. Didn't I say already this is Acclaim we're talking about? Despite the resounding success of the franchise in the wake of Tony Hawk's meteoric rise to super stardom, they went ahead and attempted to create a spin-off brand, originally called Dave Mirra BMX XXX. Expectedly, Dave Mirra wanted nothing to do with it and insisted his name and likeness was removed from anything to do with the game.

The publisher and Dave 'The Miracle Man' Mirra came to an agreement on July 31st 2002 to stop using the BMXers name. Unbeknownest to him, however, despite the legal binding, they'd no intention of stopping to use his name or likeness in order to market the title and went ahead and did so anyway, which resulted in Mirra suing the company and asking for over $20 million in damages.

To add insult to injury, somehow the Olsen twins got word of how shoddy and dilapidated their Acclaim licensed titles had been, and claiming that the developer/publisher wasn't giving their brand enough support, ended up suing.

It's around this point that any CEO who knows what they're doing would settle the jumped up executives down, overcome any development obstacles that had previously proved to be a thorn in their sides and integrate their development studios in order to create something that would put them back on the map again. Whilst keeping a low profile, they could churn out sequels to established IPs that would get the critics, and more importantly, the customers back on their sides.

What did Acclaim do? Nothing. Or more specifically, at least, the same thing they'd been doing since they first pioneered their 6-8 month development cycles back in 1992. Turok: Evolution was a rushed mess, the less said about Batman Forever, the better, the ECW games were lacklustre and Legends Of Wrestling was understated but flawed.

Speaking of Turok: Evolution, you'd think it couldn't get any worse than the whole baby bribes thing, but somehow it did. Whilst promoting Evolution, Acclaim put into practice 'Identity Marketing'. In other words, the company offered to pay five gamers to be called Turok for an entire year. They originally claimed the promotion was the idea of a Dr. Simeon Cantrell of Australia's Marketing Science Centre, author of a book called Market Their Pants Off, but this turned out to be an elaborate lie. Dr. Cantrell didn't exist. The book's ISBN number actually turned out to be a book of 'knock knock' jokes. Funnily enough, in retrospect, the joke was on you, Acclaim.

One of their last truly awful PR stunts was the Burnout 2 fiasco. To celebrate the launch of the sequel, they offered to pay the speeding fines of anyone caught on speed cameras for that day. Not only is this highly irresponsible but its also illegal, leading us to believe that at this point, they'd lost their marbles.

The straw that broke the camel's back, however, was the firing of Iguana Entertainment founder, Jeff Spangenberg, who decided, rather than to take it lying down, to take them to court over breach of contract and fraud. He believed they were trying to cut costs by cutting management, and in his words, "Acclaim had also been on a mission to cut entrepreneurial managers in their acquired units and replace them with more corporate types."

In his suit, he claimed that CEO Gregory Fischbach urged him to buy $20,000 in stocks then abruptly fired him, resulting in him losing stock options. Another area of interest within the suit was Sprangenberg's allegations that Fischbach put pressure on him to speed up development production to cut costs. Though Sprangenberg claims to have pled with him not to release another flawed game, "Fischbach was unrelenting in his demands for a product release -- with or without bugs -- in an apparent effort to post short-term profits." When the count case was finalised, Sprangenberg went on to found Retro Studios, creators of the Metroid Prime trilogy and Donkey Kong Country Returns. The rest, as they say, is history...

When a story like this comes up, its difficult to identify with the corporate and industry types, the executives who try to sell a game based on Giant Enemy Crabs. Call us cynics, but the real cynics are those who try to sell a medium we love to us with fresh gimmicks and marketing stunts that, frankly, insult our intelligence. Although I was opposed to the removal of the booth babes at E3, there was no chauvinistic or immoral undertones to my reasoning, instead factoring in the fact that they'd been such a staple part of the show for so long that removing them would also be removing a part of the cultural history. Thankfully, I was proven right, and, on another level, in the future hopefully companies out there look at exactly how Acclaim managed to shoot themselves in the foot so many times that they had no toes left through their undeserving and unwavering arrogance and 'shock factor' and learn from it.

September 29th

Many of you will know this date and its significance already, it's only 4 days from now and it's ultimately the date of the fully open beta test for Battlefield 3's Multiplayer. If you want to play the beta and you're playing on the 360 or PS3, just go to your respected dashboard on the 29th and look for the beta, you may have to look through the games list to find it, but I'm 99.9% certain that they'll be featured in the spotlight, making searching irrelevant. If you're on the PC, just go here. If you purchased the Limited Edition/Tier 1 Edition of the recent revamp of Medal of Honor then you'll have access to the beta on the 27th at some point.

Details of the beta were kept under wraps until only very recently, with only scraps of information available around the internet, mostly being unconfirmed rumors. It was under the general assumption of the public that the only way to access the beta was to buy one of the special editions of MoH, which many did. Then news started to spread around that it would be available to all and these MoH codes were in fact just early access codes. In my opinion this could be the crack that breaks the glass in the ongoing CoD vs BF war. Putting what is essentially a demonstration of the full multiplayer online for free with the only requirements to play being a console/PC and an internet connection is a genius piece of marketing by EA and my hat really goes off to them; mainly because other companies will more than likely follow suit after this. Crackdown did it first and began a fashion of games with "free" betas inside, a sales technique to sell, what the companies must believe is a shitty game and advertise a better one. Then EA came along and went, fuck it, we have enough money, here's a free beta for everyone.

Every member of CGN will be playing from the 29th onwards, so if you want to play with us hit up the beta and you may run into us. We'll all be on the 360 version, though I may dip into the PC version at some point, and one of us may hop onto the ps3 version for mere comparisons.

In the meantime here's a little montage I whipped up to tease your appetites, containing gameplay from myself and commentaries from the entire range of CGN's staff.

See you on the Battlefield!

The top five most anticipated XBLA titles

It's no secret that when the Xbox Live Arcade initially launched in 2004, it was a little underwhelming. Although the idea yielded promise, the original line-up left a lot to be desired. Aside from a few old school nostalgia trips such as Robotron: 2084 and Smash TV, there wasn't much else to write home about. How many times can we play Ms. Pac-Man and Gauntlet? The public yearned more. More diversity, more relevance and most importantly of all, more challenge. As the game library started expanding, so did the quality of the titles, in terms of Microsoft's selection of both stone cold classics and the more original, indie-flavoured sleeper hits.

With breakthrough smashes such as Bionic Commando: Re-Armed, Castlevania: Symphony Of The Night, Trials HD, Shadow Complex and the Geometry Wars series, a new era was ushered in with regards to downloadable content. As of August 2011, there have been 413 titles added to the marketplace, and an estimated 70% of Xbox Live users have downloaded at least one title, averaging out at roughly 6-7 titles per user. With statistics like this in under a decade of implementation, it's hard not to be impressed, and with the current 2011-2012 line-up, we're in for a few well deserved treats.


5. Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (TBA 2012)

You'd be hard pressed to meet a gamer anywhere in the world who hasn't heard of the renowned Half-Life mod Counter-Strike. Originally 'developed' by Jess 'Cliffe' Cliffe and Minh 'Gooseman' Le, it was later adopted and expanded upon by Valve and both modders went on to work for the company. As much as IGN could be improved, the fact that they rank both original developers as number 14 in their top 100 game creators of all time list speaks volumes.

At one point, it was the most played first person shooter in the world, a claim it wore as a badge of pride for more consecutive years than almost any other shooter to date. Its immense popularity was so consuming, in fact, that in 2002 it was outselling all PC FPS counterparts at a 3:1 ratio. In recent years, its popularity has waned, but only slightly. It remains a heavyweight contender and somewhat of a phenomenon in the PC market.

With semi-pretenders Blacklight: Tango Down and Battlefield 1943 failing to ignite the market, it seems like there could be potential for a new competitive arcade FPS daddy. Providing Valve get it right and it doesn't feel constrictive or unsatisfying, we could see a trailblazer in action. With Doug Lombardi promising to "expand on CS' award-winning gameplay," its hard not to feel confident. After all, Valve are one of the few companies who have rarely put a foot wrong in their fifteen years in the industry, a feat accomplished by few, if any, others.

Whilst at the time of writing, little has been made official, it wouldn't be presumptious to assume Valve are intending on updating maps and gameplay modes, with perhaps the addition of a selection of newer maps. The old phrase 'if it isn't broken, don't try to fix it' comes to mind as CS 1.6 has remained the most consistent and enduringly popular out of all the mods and expansions. If you've yet to play it, or if you're a veteran of it, it doesn't matter. Buy it, appreciate it, enjoy it. You never know, you could be at the forefront of something very special, indeed.


4. Mortal Kombat Arcade Kollection (August 31st 2011)

Okay, we admit it, this is a dodgy one. Remembered more for its fatalities, almost needless amount of gore and its abundance of borderline broken fighting mechanics, Mortal Kombat has been up until very recently a difficult sell. Even its publisher Midway, the undisputed king of the cash-ins, relied a little too heavily on it and ended up filing for bankruptcy in 2009.

With Warner Bros picking up the rights to both the franchise and a wide variety of other Midway assets, however, we've started to see a change of pace and direction for the franchise. By making the newest title, the self-proclaimed Mortal Kombat, a balancing act between accessibility and a deeper fighting experience, the series has achieved dual accolades for the first time in its existence via critical and commercial response.

This factor has no doubt been taken into consideration by Warner Bros, and the release of this port of the original three titles is most likely a response to the rapturous response to its predecessor. One of the main reasons anybody truly cares about this Kollection is the return of Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3. Cruelly taken off Xbox Live Arcade (before we realised it had been reduced to 400 points) due to licensing issues, this affected a small, somewhat niche band of fighting enthusiasts, including myself, who ended up feeling deprived of the simple yet satisfying combinations and the ability to rip your friends head off over Xbox Live Arcade.

The reasoning for this being that sometimes, not often, but nevertheless occasionally, broken games can be fun. Not fun in a Dynasty Warriors (excluding the original) or Serious Sam sort of way, but fun in a loop the same combo in a corner and watch your opponents reaction sort of way. How else could you explain the persistently groundless popularity of the Mortal Kombat franchise. Considering it first launched in 1992 and in many senses has progressively deteriorated over the years (excluding the newest title), that's almost twenty years of mediocrity. Bearing in mind that it only took one or two titles to sink Pandemic, Bizarre Creations and Realtime Worlds, all of which have more talent in their baby fingers than the entire NetherRealm Studio development team, it is puzzling if nothing else.

With this in mind, while the original two titles leave a lot to be desired, they are by no means unplayable. Of course, they lack the charm and allure of Street Fighter 2, but they are entertaining on a more basic level. Of course, Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 is where you should be directing your attention to, with its impressive roster of characters and least broken fighting mechanics, but the total package for 800 is a steal.



3. Guardian Heroes (Q3 2011)

In spite of its somewhat cult-like status, Guardian Heroes is widely considered to be both the best game on the Sega Saturn and the best scrolling beat-em-up ever made. With its branching pathes, multiple endings and karma meter (a meter which determines how the game concludes depending on your actions throughout), it really was ahead of its time.

Developed by the illustrious Treasure, makers of such critical darlings as Dynamite Headdy, Gunstar Heroes (no relation), Ikaruga, Sin & Punishment and Radiant Silvergun... Treasure remain a creative force to be reckoned with. Their mentality of smaller teams making tight and responsive titles which push the boundaries of innovation to breaking point bodes well for their output and reception. Sometimes less is more and with Treasure that's definitely the case. Their last original game, Sin & Punishment: Star Successor came out in Japan in 2009. Since then, the Call Of Duty/Modern Warfare franchise alone has released two new titles, with a third merely months away. That ought to put it in perspective.

Due to the rarity of the game itself, not a lot of people, particularly in Europe, have been able to get their hands on a copy, which is a crying shame because of the calibre of the mechanics and structure of the game. Many will (incorrectly) tell you that the Saturn had no good games. Naturally, such a standpoint is misguided at best, but its difficult to blame someone for adopting it.

Sega's European and American divisions left a lot to be desired during the 32-bit era. Instead of capitalising on their strongest developers in Japan, alteratively they attempted to port bad rehashes of existing games from competitive systems. Needless to say, this didn't end well, as the Saturn was optimised for 2D games first and foremost and the rest is history. We're not going to sit and list off every great game for the system as we'd be here all day but if you don't believe us, by all means give Guardian Heroes a play through.


2. Radiant Silvergun (TBA 2011)

Continuing on the Sega Saturn bandwagon, here's an example of another Treasure classic, the rich and rewarding Radiant Silvergun. In spite of how infamous its price tag has became in recent years, it is actually really good. The ability to switch between an assortment of weapons and the sheer domineering ferocity of the enemy attack patterns is something that has to be seen to be believed. Whereas it is by no means the hardest shmup of all time (that commendation goes to the frankly astonishing Mushihimesama Futari), it is still insanely difficult. Treasure also make a point of exemplifying what they do best: making bosses that defy the odds (and often gravity).

Few could present opposition to Treasure's boss design, attack patterns and graphical prowess. Those who've encountered Seven Force in Gunstar Heroes not only know what we're talking about, but could also most likely list in detail each form of the encounter, which is undisputedly a testament to their ability to construct a memorable boss character. What's even more interesting is the little homages and references contained within Treasure titles. The last boss, Xiga, in particular, should elicit some fond memories from more retro-orientated gamers.

Through the re-release of this seminal classic, Treasure has opted to include several new features. From a purely visual standpoint, it has been overhauled with HD visuals, which will undoubtedly deal with all the jaggies encountered in the Saturn version. On top of this, they've also decided to include leaderboards, online co-op and an Ikaruga-inspired shooting mode. We're excited. You should be too.


1. Street Fighter: Third Strike (August 24th 2011)

This article has been written to coincide with the release of what many consider to be the greatest beat-em-up ever made. Truth be told, we'd intended to get this out sooner, but time has a funny way of creeping up on you. It seemed like only yesterday that the word on the grapevine was that it was being re-released in HD. It felt like a dream then, it feels like a dream now.

Continuing on the HD trail, as previously mentioned, it has been overhauled in HD which despite not making a huge difference, is still a nice touch. A few other nice touches are the addition of challenges, online play and a theater system which allows players to upload their matches onto YouTube. To all five of you who haven't seen the Daigo VS Justin Wong EVO 2004 'The Beast is Unleashed' video, Capcom's Third Strike places a huge emphasis on technicality, which is best expressed through competitive play. Often imitated, and rarely, if ever, bettered, Third Strike set the benchmark back in 1999 when it was released.

Although we've progressed through a few updates, it seems the third (or fourth in this scenario) edition is the conclusive piece to the Street Fighter puzzle. Like a fine wine, it has aged well, and although it has remained suspiciously absent from some of the professional tournament scenes in recent years, hopefully this updated version puts the spotlight back where it should never have left.

It's mechanics, from the most basic level of parrying to cancelling into a Super Art, are flawlessly implemented and though at the start it can be a little off-putting to newcomers, if you're new to it, stick with it and the cogs will all eventually click into place.

The only main criticism comes from the limited character roster, which admittedly isn't its strongest point. The irony is that Capcom's biggest criticism in general is its ability to milk a popular franchise to saturation point. The multitude of different Street Fighter 2 titles by itself is cause of concern, as even some of the more preferred series out there are outmatched in number by how many times its been re-released. Third Stike is a breath of fresh air in this department, and while some (okay, most) characters could be improved, there are no Stryker's in there. Intriguingly, some of the best players in the world use the likes of Q, Necro and Oro - characters most would agree are completely useless.

The inclusion of competitive online matches should be sufficient enough to wet even the hardest critics appetite. Back in 2004, when it was released on the Xbox as part of the Anniversary Edition package, Xbox Live was still finding its feet and it was difficult to get matches with anyone but Japanese prodigies. These days, XBL is unmistakenly dominant in the online division and both Street Fighter and Third Strike are more popular than they've been in quite some time. This is primarily down to the success of numero four and its expansions but at the same time Daigo's incredible comeback video can no doubt be at least partially attributed to the increasing demand in player's curiosities.

Adding a tournament mode and customisable player matches (best two out of three rounds, matches and best four out of seven matches) should mix it up and keep the game on the online rankings list. Those new to it are in for the Knickerbocker Glory-style treat of their lives, something that looks horrifingly good yet somehow manages to taste even better. Appropriately, the old guard have similar benefits, primarily the ability to pulverise any and all who stand against them accompanied by a new soundtrack by celebrated composer Simon Viklund of Bionic Commando: Re-Armed fame. See you on the battle ground.

EA VS Activision (Round One)

As you've no doubt already heard, the war of words between EA, Activision and every internal developer associated with the Battlefield and Modern Warfare brands has reached boiling point, but the only question we can ask is, is it really necessary? As much as the general populace laps up a feud, whether its business or personal, it isn't always the right path to take and in some cases can end up damaging a product's accountability and leverage within the industry. Just ask Guerrilla Games, who rather infamously pronounced Killzone to be a "Halo killer" long before the product shipped, an accusation that the company, in many respects, has still to live down to this day.

Uncompromisingly aiming for the jugular of an industry opponent has its benefits; it demonstrates that companies aren't just faceless, it builds hype and it tends to be a cataclyst for thousands, if not tens or hundreds of thousands of arguments resonating around the world over which franchise is superior, thus keeping them both in the public spotlight and drawing extra attention to the developers behind them. On the other hand, however, it can have an opposite affect to the intended purpose. There's a fine line between competitive pot shots and borderline desperation. We're by no means suggesting that in this scenario that's the case, but simultaneously, on the other end of the spectrum, its difficult not to raise certain questions - is EA's seemingly constant browbeating really benefiting the Battlefield brand as a whole, or is this rivalry solely geared towards increasing sales, and by extension, taking marketshare away from the market leader? Chances are, it's a little bit of both.

One of the predominant issues lies within the fact that Battlefield has in many ways already surpassed Call Of Duty, or Modern Warfare, specifically, in the quality department. Aside from diehard Call Of Duty players (which, let's face it, is the majority of online console gamers), most would agree that Bad Company 2 is the premier online first person shooter experience. The Frostbite engine alone is near legendary in its capabilities, and the game just keeps delivering to those willing to get past those first few gruelling hours with no equipment. The sheer depth, customisability (that's not simply an aesthetic overhaul), balance and 'feel' enhance Bad Company 2 in such a way that it stands head and shoulders above the vast majority of titles on the market today, including in many respects Activision's behemoth franchise. In the words of EA CEO John Riccitiello, "a lot of people bought Modern Warfare more for the coffee table and didn’t play it for two months." Fighting words, indeed.

To really get a feel for this whole back-and-forth exchange, however, we must take it back to the beginning. Believe it or not, the instigator in this fiasco was DICE back in March 2011 when Karl-Magnus Troedsson, the general manager, stated in an interview with Official PlayStation Magazine UK that their competitors were "getting lazy" and that Activision are "using the same engine, the same recipe for building a game" continuing "at some point you need to take that leap. I haven't seen them take that leap since a long time ago." If this wasn't bad enough, he signed off with a warning shot; "we're coming for you."

EA then proceeded to add fuel to the fire when, less than a month later, John Riccitiello claimed that there'll be "a couple of hundred million dollars [worth of] marketing against these two products," adding that Battlefield 3 is "designed to take [Call of Duty] down." Fast forward to E3 2011 and an admittedly overzealous Bobby Kotick, or at least his personal assistants, try to skip the queue at EA's E3 booth in order to get a hands-on playtest with arguably their biggest rivals title. After much deliberation and many phone calls later, the senior members of EA decide to block Kotick's entrance, claiming that "it would not be possible," essentially stipulating that he must join the back of the queue if he wants to get his hands on it like everybody else.

This can be considered the true beginning of the feud, with Kotick responding in a CNBC interview that "well so far I've only seen Battlefield 3 shown on a PC, so I haven't seen it on a console which is where the bulk of our business is," continuing, "if it's just a PC title as it looks like today, that's a very small audience to participate." This sort of belittlement is befitting of Kotick's general outlook on competition and of the industry he helped blossom; an industry which his company is now ranked number one in the world in (at least in terms of sales and profitability anyway).

Riccitiello's response? "If Bobby thinks that's PC footage, he's in real trouble," a sentiment later echoed by DICE on their official Twitter feed. From here on, it has been suspiciously quiet from the Activision camp, while EA and John Riccitiello have been going to town on Activision's most coveted brand, going as far to state that "our game is more authentic," adding that its "definitely going to do a lot of things better." Riccitiello has also taken it a step further by stating that he would be happy to see Call Of Duty "rot from the core."

Strong words from a company who were considered Public Enemy No.1 for the majority of this industry's lifetime, a fact Riccitiello has been doing his best to remedy with excellent titles such as Dead Space and Mirror's Edge since he took over as CEO. While he has almost unanimously taken the company in a better direction than the yearly updates it used to churn out and rely on despite a lack of significant updates, it should never be forgotten that at the end of the day he is a corporate man and he is there to help his company turn a sizable profit and remain sustainable, especially in a business as turbulent as this one.

The seemingly inherently evil Activision have remained reasonably tight-lipped on the subject, with Activision Publishing's CEO Eric Hirshberg even going as far to state that "we focus on what we need to do to make the best games we can. We don’t pay much mind looking at what the competitors are doing. I know they are focused on us… well that’s all I’ll say." As much as the world loves to hate Activision, even their most staunch opposition, both in the business and outside of it, couldn't criticise their handling of this situation. Whereas EA have been virtually calling for blood, aside from a few pot shots, Activision has stayed judiciously classy. Being the number one publisher, with the two most successful franchises of the past decade affords the leniency and luxury of such a stance. Being at the top isn't easy but the install base is there and if their proposed Elite service for Modern Warfare 3 succeeds then many Call Of Duty devotees are even more mindless than we give them credit for.

No matter what way you look at it, EA is fighting a losing battle, but at least its something they can admit. EA's Vice President and General Manager of their UK branch, Keith Ramsdale has in the past addressed its direct competition when he answered when asked if they could beat Modern Warfare sales with a rather abrupt "no." If they already possess this knowledge, then the initial opening question still stands, why? There's little doubt that with its proposed $100 million marketing budget Battlefield 3 is guaranteed to take numbers away from the behemoth that is Call Of Duty, just like its predecessor Battlefield: Bad Company 2 did last year, but its still unlikely to be enough. If there's one thing that's been reiterated time and time in the games industry, its that we should never underestimate the power, allure and dedicated audiences of a brand. Every big hitter since the Atari 2600 has been franchised and replicated for decades and Call Of Duty is no different. The only difference here is that very few brands will ever be able to come anywhere close to the sales and record breaking statistics of Activision's baby.

This is something EA is no doubt already aware of, and in spite of their protests that Battlefield will overtake it in sales at some point, with EA's Jens Uwe Intat confident enough to insist "the only question is when that day will be" concluding "the sooner the better," it is not looking like something that is likely anywhere in the near future. EA's focus on Frostbite 2.0, and in spite of direct competition, their emphasis on the fact that they believe "lighting’s better, physics is better, animations are better, particle effects are better [and] vehicles are better," has also came under scrutiny, with Sledgehammer's co-founder Glen Schofield going as far to claim that "you ship a game, not an engine," adding "I've seen that trick and the bottom line is, this game [Modern Warfare 3] will run at 60 frames a second. Not sure any of our competitors will".

You can't help but assume that Frostbite must be making negative waves over at Activision HQ, being one of the most technically proficient and immersive engines we've seen to date, but brand recognition is the most important factor to consider and Call Of Duty is unmistakenly dominant in this department. EA and DICE seem to be concentrating on how much better their game is going to be, but an amazing game does not necessarily convert into amazing sales. There are dozens of fallen masterpieces littered throughout the battlefield that is the sales chart. Just look at Singularity, ICO, Okami and Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath for inspiration.

Although critics mistakenly quoted DICE's Patrick Bach saying the two rival developers are not even "competing at the same sport" recently, this was taken out of context. What he meant was that the two franchises were competing at different levels and as a result aiming at somewhat different demographics. "It really comes down to personal preference. You choose based on the depth you want, the maturity level, your own personal taste ... it's all about how you get your fix," he was quoted as saying. In the single player department, Call Of Duty, with its grandoise set pieces, scale and 'epic' factor will no doubt be the more contained, but ultimately more refined story mode, but in the online game, where it counts, there is little doubt Battlefield 3 will win with ease.

Of course, its down to personal preference, but in terms of lastability, depth and gameplay (all of the things which matter), the Battlefield series is much more consistent. It appeals to the hardcore, the type of player who has no problem putting hundreds of hours in and still being taught new tricks and trades, those who want a more team-orientated focus. With EA going all out on Call Of Duty, its difficult not to be skeptical. The last thing any Battlefield player would want is the series to adopt the saturate-rinse-and-repeat mentality of the Call Of Duty series, its near perfect as it is. Everybody loves a bit of smack talking, just don't get lost in a haze aiming for a market that will have difficulty adjusting to the tactical yet rewarding methodology that makes Battlefield such a compelling and enriching experience.

Update:

Although I finished this article a few weeks ago, I decided to sit on it in order to let other articles sink in, however, during this period the rivalry has taken a tumultuous turn. If you're a gamer, there's no doubt you've heard about the http://www.modernwarfare3.com disaster. Right now, its up in the air. While most initially assumed redirecting this website towards the Battlefield 3 page was EA's handiwork, many in the industry have speculated that this would be breaking US copyright law.

This was further confirmed when a video embedded on the website had this choice quote for Activision: "Modern Warfare is crap. On November 6th, 2011, the most over-hyped first-person action series of all-time returns with the copy and paste sequel to the lacklustre Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 2... Pre-order Call Of Duty MW3 today for Xbox 360, PS3, and PC to secure exclusive bonuses only available online for Modern Warfare 3 fanboys who don't know that Battlefield 3 is the better game."

Needless to say, Activision aren't happy about this embarrassing coup d'etat and have went as far as to file a complaint with the National Arbitration Forum in order to seize and secure the website. In order for them to succeed, there must be sufficient evidence that the website is "identical or confusingly similar to" its Call Of Duty trademarks. On the other hand, the complaint suggests that the only way the perpetrators can keep the website is by "making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or tarnish the trademark" We'll keep you posted on how this story develops.