Datamonitor claims that the dedicated console hardware market will peak in three years; that software will peak in two; and that on-line gaming will rise tenfold by the turn of the century. Gaming has until recently been a solitary event but the acceptance of Windows hardware has led to a dramatic growth of access in all sorts of on-line areas. First came information; then communication; now the promise of interactivity. But even though many personal computer add-ons are approaching the power of consoles, 64-bit toys like Nintendo Co Ltd’s N64 and 3DO Co’s M2 chip are keeping up, and the trend of the Windows industry towards low-power on-board chips means the market could again diverge. That leaves us back with the consoles. As Nintendo launches the N64 in the US, Cassandras are already muttering about how limited is the future of the dedicated games console. Research group Mintel estimated the games market at $1bn back in 1992. Just four years later, it is marginally over half that. The heyday of Sonic and Mario is over and the big three – Sony Corp, Sega Enterprises Ltd and Nintendo – are regrouping. Put that against the Datamonitor’s prediction that on-line gaming will grow to 20% of the market from its current 2% and it’s clear that some rethinking has to be done. Sega’s response to this heightened competition has been to diversify away from console games into indoor theme parks, bar gaming and the Internet. Its purchase of UK bar-and-club games giant JPM Ltd was on e part of a diversification strategy; its new $200 Internet strap-on for the Saturn, another.
Celebrity parties
Sega had some work to do when Sony quickly and efficiently stole its lead position. In the console wars, cool is king, so Sony pitched the PlayStation as the console for non-dedicated gamers – ironically the same pitch that Sega used to win over the cynical to computer games and best Nintendo 10 years ago – and its placement in night clubs, music festivals and celebrity parties gave it the hype to win. Sega’s response was to move to the Internet with a promise to demystify it. Our rivals have nothing to touch it, said the company of its vastly over-priced modem. Frankly, Nintendo and Sony don’t want to. Sony’s position is fixed. The PlayStation is a stand-alone games machine, the company says adamantly. In terms of network connections, the Internet is not nearly ready for the sort of games we have. Admittedly, networks are an important part of gaming, but until the infrastructure is there we’ll not consider it. Nintendo, comfortable that it now has one of the top 10 most wanted items on the US Christmas list, is saying nothing about its plans. One area where the console and personal computer companies could co-operate – but probably won’t – is in the type of games available on-line. The multi-user dungeon is a well-esta blished game form that goes back almost as far as the Internet itself. Whether you type commands or drag objects on a graphical interface, the idea is basically the same – go into a room, pick things up, learn stuff. Another tried-and-tested format is the gambling forum and this will likely gain the most revenue in the three- to five-year future simply because it’s a form that is understandable to all age groups. (If you have any doubts how many sites there will be, look up Gambling at www.yah oo.com.) Although it’s not yet written in stone, Apple Computer Inc is considering marketing itself as a games company at the highest levels.
By Morgan Holt
Apple’s games evangelist, Mark Gavini is keen to emphasize how serious he is about games: We’ve been running against this game machine image of the Mac for ages. ‘The Mac is not a toy,’ we’d say. Well now we’re changing that. Yes it is! It’s a grea t toy! Over and above pushing the Pippin as a games console, the company is also discussing the Common Game Format. It should be possible to create a common environment for games so you could fly into this universe from a flight simulation game wh ile someone else in a tank game can try shooting you down. It’s an ideal environment for on-line games and one on which Apple is focusing a great deal of attention – although it’s not overly keen to tell you that yet. As to how this comes about, th ere is yet another schism cropping up: that of the networks versus game centers versus the independents. On the network side, in theory, the whole shebang will involve the cable companies, phone companies, personal computer majors and console makers working in happy consort. So far, the only names to have made a pitch are the phone companies and AT&T Corp has abandoned its ImagiNation Network already. British Telecommunications Plc, on the other hand, launches its Wireplay games network on whi ch players can compete against each other in dungeons, spaceships or pool halls (though not yet all three), in a matter of days. The truly multiplayer game is not here, the company says, but when it is, we’ll be ready. That’s a view that newly-reformed 3DO is keen to dispute. Having retreated from the console and sold licensing rights for its 64-bit M2 chip to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co to do with it what it will, it is the archetypal independent – and it already has a 25,000-player game in place: Meridian 59. The 3DO view is that if a game supports the TCP/IP Internet standard, it is not necessary to have a dedicated network. British Telecom’s immediate advantage is that the games are free and you pay only for the time you play – a key advantage of the proprietary on-line model as held by the likes of America Online Inc which are able to bill their registered members. The other two models are the emerging cybercash tokens, and on-site advertising, a tempting revenue stream but hardly one to justify the cost of giving your well-established games away for free. In British Telecom’s case, the members are no more than owners of a public telephone. The on-line games centers, on the other hand, will (in some cases, already do) rely on credit cards, micro-transaction payments or advertising to gain their revenues. The biggest and the best (for example, The Entertainment Network’s game-centric site at www.ten.net or EOL at www.eol.com which favors gambling) will introduce you to like-minded people playing on-line versions of Quake, Duke Nukem 3D, or whatever is the latest apocalyptic entertainment. At the moment, these are easily the most popular hubs of on-line gamers, and are likely to remain so until the conso le makers and computer majors start talking.
Network Computer
Sega, too, is venturing into the games service arena, hand-in-hand with Mitsubishi Electric Corp to launch the Virtual Game Center this November at an estimated capitalization of $150m. Like British Telecom’s Wireplay, software will be free and money made on the time people spend playing. Sega’s European marketing director, Andy Mee, sees no reason why Saturn owners shouldn’t be playing Windows gamers in the future – although it’s anyone’s guess how far in the future that may be. In a rather conservative contrast, Nintendo has talked of no such plans and has only launched an N64 Web site for diehard fans to swap killing tips. What we would hope to see in the future is a combination of consoles and personal computers, but it won’t happen until there is a common gaming reference platform and if consoles really are coming under the squeeze, competitive pressures will make that a very unlikely scenario indeed until the eleventh hour. As for the Network Computer, the basic power of the machine makes it an unlikely candidate for any game above the multi-user dungeon – which by the time the thing is established will probably outstrip any processing and network capacity it can handle anyway. No one is holding out for the Network Computer except the corporates that will be the first to install dumb terminals as a cheaper network-centric method of computing. Given that networks – and companies – provide the first serious test of inter-player competition, it will be an immediate complaint if the only games you can play at work will be those that the network administrator sees fit to install on the server.