The Media of the Future

In the video game industry, that is.

For a long while people have been talking about what really revolutionized gaming. Was it the 360 and PlayStation 3 with their crisp and beautiful HD graphics, or was it the little Wii with its motion control that had a "for anyone and everyone" appeal. Debate has been heavy on this issue on the internet, and it looks like it wont really be resolved anytime soon, even though quite a few are beginning to see the Wii mostly as a temporary entertainment solution.

So what's in store for the future?
Well, for one - Natal.

Microsoft's Project Natal, is going to be an add-on for the Xbox 360, which is coming out late year, and since its announcement at E3 this year, its been a very hot topic in the gaming industry. Many feel it will be another gimmicky entry into motion control, while others see great potential in it.

Natal is a form of camera, full of infrared sensors, voice recognition software and much more. It will allow you to control games with you body, your voice - nothing handheld needed. To turn off your Xbox - just say "goodnight" or "shut down". Play a quiz game with friends or family, and the first to answer the question will be recognized via voice recognition.

The main thing about this that is keeping people hopeful that it will truly become a revolution in the gaming media, is the support of major game developers and publishers. It seems it has attracted many of the big fish, and that can have a vital role in the product's progress from launch.

This project could truly change the way we look a video games, but it could also be another "eye-toy" or "vision camera". I for one see the potential, and encourage everyone to watch this video, they did include a bit of ridiculous content in it, but I guess Microsoft wanted to appeal to the largest audience possible. 


If you were as intrigued by this video as i was, you should look at this video as well. A bit of a mindblowing video on Natal, and one of the projects being worked on for it named Milo.

Natal is Microsofts 

On "Click-Through Activism"

Inspired by the nice discussion we had in class, I just wanted to dedicate a blog-post to this subject. After reading the Washington Post article on "Neda", I felt surprised about how many actually ended up supporting this cause on their facebook. According to the article currently, groups on the subject had "nearly 36,000 members; dozens more had 1,000, or 100, or 10.". This really shows that this Click-Through Activism has become a seriously big thing to participate in.

For one, I have not partaken in it, since around a year ago now probably. The worst case seen at my high school, was during the peak of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis this year, when practically everyone donated their status' to "the .... victims". It was obvious from the beginning that Palestine had the main support in our school (it was an international school - had it been a typical American high school, things would probably have been different). No one actually did anything apart from joining the "fad" of donating their status' and joining groups. I can say this because i was seeing it happen.

It actually got really bad because, even though it was only an online show of support for either nation - the overwhelming number of Palestine "supporters" would actually make fun of, or bad mouth whoever few were donating their status' to Israeli victims. Especially a few Jewish highschoolers  had a hard time during that period of time. It was almost as if this overwhelming online support for Palestine created a little form of antisemitism at our school. It is incredible to see how far these armchair activists can take something, that they won't even support beyond their facebook status, or in discussions in school.


 

So apparently

...I'm a "roving node".
"You are an Roving Node"

"If you are a Roving Node, you are an active manager of your social and work lives using your mobile device. You get the most out of basic applications – such as email or texting – and find them great for dealing with the logistics of your life and enhancing personal productivity. You are more of a hub for information flows than a source of digital content. You are heavily reliant on all of your ICTs for communicating and gathering information."

I guess when reading through this, it seems pretty true. Especially since getting a Blackberry, I feel like I'm constantly "online and connected". I don't really know whether or not this is a good thing or not though, sure I have an endless amount of information at my fingertips, but at the same time its probably the biggest source of distraction imaginable. Its basically procrastination in the form of a phone. Countless hours could be spent just browsing the internet on it, at least it used to be limited to my computer and therefore at home, but now - its everywhere.

With that though, there's the upside of always being able to find the solution to things immediately, instead of waiting till you get home, and possibly forget what you were going to look for. It allows one to stay in touch with friends and family, something that can be really important in some situations, and one can always reach emergency services.

The quiz also says I'm not really someone who adds new content to the net, which is true - I leave that to people who like (in some cases) humiliating themselves on youtube. -------------------->

Also, for other content, I'd just be afraid that I was posting something wrong, stupid or otherwise "flamable". No, I'm definitely a hub for information flows - most of the topics that come up during the day for my friends and I, are things some of us have read - or heard from someone who read them online.

Ads in Videogames?

First of all I'd like to say the reason for the recent inactivity on the blog from my part, has been due to me having to get a new PC. My old one died on me this October after 3 long years and I just recently found my replacement in a nice Vaio.

So to start off my blog again, I'd like to talk about advertising in videogames. This particular area is one that Advertising companies are currently working their way into. Actually, one can already find examples in specific games out there, that include advertising, but so far its mainly seen in sports games that advertise for other sports games. However, actual product placement has in rare cases found its way into videogames, for example EA's Need for Speed Underground 2 features product placement with companies like Best Buy, Cingular Wireless, Old Spice and even Burger King. It seems that EA Games, have been the first major game publishing house that has allowed serious advertising to take place in their games. Even other companies have included these as well, such as Ubisoft in their Splinter Cell series once had this huge glowing Axe body spray commercial featured:




Question is, do gamers want ads in their games?

There seems to be two different opinions on this question among many gamers. Some believe that ads in their games enhance the realism, as instead of seeing made up products, one could see things from the real world. This could let the gamer have an easier time really immersing himself in the game, and thereby enjoying it even more. On the other hand, some gamers see this as an intrusion into the one kind of media, that until now has remained relatively untouched by ads, and one place to escape from the constant bombardment of commercials found both on the internet, radio and TV.

Personally, I don't mind particularly, at least as long as we aren't forced to sit and watch an actual commercial in-game. If that was the case, i'd be extremely anti in-game advertising. It seems though that many advertisers are figuring video game advertising into their budget. Money previously spent on TV and print is now being redirected to in-game advertising.The interest in product placement in video games is increasing and the technology is already advancing to new levels. Massive Inc. is releasing new technology that gives advertisers a way to update their ads even after the game's release, which means advertisers will be able to constantly keep games updated with new ads.Something completely new, and which opens up many new possibilities for these companies, as they can also focus on specific target audiences in different games.

Should be an interesting thing to follow, as this last place without much advertising will probably soon be the newest to always feature them.

Censorship. Why?

Reading some of the censored articles for tomorrow, a few really struck my eye. One was originally Japanese, questioning the war on terror, 9/11's origins and also touched on other controversial issues. It specifically mentioned how during 9/11, World Trade Center, building 7 - a 47 floor tall building, collapsed mere hours after the main buildings, without any mention in any of the reports of the incident. Sure no one was supposedly killed, but leaving that big a building out of any reports? Seems a little suspicious, and no wonder conspiracy theories arose out of that one story alone.

However, after researching more in depth, I found several sources citing that the damage caused by the collapse of nearby WTC main buildings was extensive, and that fires had been burning inside the building for a long time, and was never put out. This ended up damaging the supporting concrete so badly that the building collapsed.

My question is therefore, why would this particular building be kept out of the reports - if there are actually firemen testifying to have witnessed these fires inside the building, seen the damage - why hasn't the media commmented on it. Many conspiracies surrounding the whole event, would have had a lot less credibility if people had been told the real story about this building - if it indeed is the real story.

By censoring this article, it makes it seem like there really was a reason why it was kept out of reports, and the fact that all these accounts detailing why it happened came out so late, just make it seem like an excuse had to be made, before the media could release any information about this particular building. The whole idea about all this censorship also just makes me question what happened to the supposed freedom of the press in this country? Having lived here for just 3 years, I don't know how all things work here in the States, but in Denmark, freedom of speech/press is taken very seriously - just look at the Mohammed cartoons if you want to know what I mean.

Is the government - and whoever else is behind it, really just hurting themselves by censoring articles like these? Are there really things we can't handle seeing? It all seems like fuel for the conspiracy train to me. If the government was indeed behind 9/11 (which I don't believe FYI) then maybe they should have their stories ready, and not leave out material that the public will definitely find.

Blown Away

I was doing the reading for tomorrow earlier, and I just found myself completely shocked over the insane amount of conglomeration that has been going on. Looking at the exhibits from C&H page 41-43 just completely blew me away. I for one, had no idea that AOL and Disney alone own so many different sources and kinds of media. It just seems completely ridiculous how much power they have by owning so much of the media production, on so many levels. My roommate knew, but I had no idea that Disney owned ESPN, and for me that was extremely surprising as it seems so... not Disney-like.

As mentioned in the book, these companies can do some intense promotion of their own products, through their own media outlets. When Harry Potter was released by Warner Brothers, (owned by AOL Time Warner) was then promoted on tv by all AOLs channels, given ads in their 64 magazines with around 268 million readers, and then promoted further on websites such as moviefone, also owned by AOL. Reading these lists of all these household names and finding out that they are all owned by just a handful of huge corporations is quite mindblowing, and one begins to wonder if there are certain cross-media strategies that these larger corporations could use that could truly influence us all in ways beyond what has already been seen.

In Germany during WW2, Germany's Joseph Goebbels was a propaganda mastermind - even his official title was minister of propaganda, and what other way to spread it than through the media. It seems pretty clear from what happened in the prewar years during Hitlers rize, that propaganda had an enourmous effect on the German people. So the question arises if this could be happening today as well, but perhaps in a much less radical way. Who can say that we are not being affected in any way? And with conglomerates such as ours, that own pretty much every aspect of the media, it is easy to imagine them all trying to affect the largest amount of people in a way that promotes their own ends, obvious ones being sales of their products etc.

But what if they are all promoting specific political agendas, that benefit them in some way. Promoting specific political candidates, because of views that could promote the particular conglomerate's interests. It's certainly food for thought. What if your opinions aren't ur own, but a mix of a few different conglomerates' views that have affected you through their many media outlets?  

Just a little fun.

Since I mentioned The Dailty Show earlier, i figured I'd share a link to one of my favorite moments. All about my home country, which I left about 3 years ago now. What's the Matter with Denmark?