knockknock.biz luggage tags. Photo courtesy of justinph.

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

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

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

Cheers,

 180 Degrees columnist Bill Harris and his son Eli playing Super Mario Galaxy on the Wii 

Last month, in his debut guest column for Level Up, Dubious Quality blogger Bill Harris combined an interview with Armageddon Empires creator Viv Davis with an analysis of sales its patterns to help understand how indie developers must market their games differently from their deep-pocketed rivals. In today's essay, The Austin, Texas-based analyst (who does not cover videogames in a professional capacity) looks back on six years of fatherhood and gaming with his son, Eli. Level Up would like to wish all of the fathers among our readership a happy Father's Day, and we hope you enjoy this column.

"Hey, Dad, do you want to play a little Super Mario Galaxy before you go to work?" Eli's already turned on the Wii, because he already knows my answer.

I woke up tired this morning, just as I have every day since my son was born.

In 2001.

For Eli 6.10, "sleeping in" means 7 a.m., and when he wakes up, he's all go. My mom says he reminds her of me. It's hard to remember a time when I had trampolines in my shoes, but I like the thought. And him.

Here's the thing about being a father: it's impossible to understand how much you'll care.

I don't know much about my own father, who was never around, and the few times I was with him always seemed to turn into gut-wrenching disappointments. So when Eli was born, I keenly wanted him to have a good father, even though I had no idea how to be one.

Almost seven years later, I'm still trying to figure that out. What I do know, though, is that forty years is a long, long time. We grew up in different worlds, and while I live in his world, he's never lived in mine.

To read the rest of Harris' column, click on the link below. 

When we brought attorney Justin Blankenship aboard the good ship Level Up as our legal correspondent, we fully intended to have him write about subjects other than Electronic Arts' attempted takeover of Take-Two. And indeed, he has other columns in the works. But when news broke of a new dust up between Take-Two and the Federal Trade Commission, we knew we had to ask Blankenship to explain it all for you, Dear Reader. As we've said before, Blankenship previously worked in the FTC's Mergers 2 division in Washington, D.C. from 2001-2004, which gives him tremendous insight into the FTC's methodology. In today's column, he explains why EA agreed to hold off on its acquisition of Take-Two for at least 45 days, as well as the FTC's affidavit alleging that Take-Two is stonewalling its second request for information. The law is ordinarily a dry beast, but we assure you that if you take the time to read through to the end, you'll find some juicy morsels of analysis waiting for you. Enjoy.

Two pieces of news surfaced during the past week regarding the Federal Trade Commission's review of Electronic Arts' ongoing efforts to acquire Take Two. Here's a brief update on what exactly is going on, and where the investigation appears to be headed.

On June 4, EA announced that it would be extending its $25.74 per share offer for Take-Two stock an additional two weeks. EA also announced that it had agreed with the FTC to hold off on its acquisition until the FTC had concluded its investigation, or the expiration of 45 days, whichever occurs first. It's worth noting that although EA may have made a deal with the FTC that could potentially allow the deal to move forward in 45 days, EA would be moving forward at its own peril if the FTC hasn't concluded its investigation.

If the FTC decided that a deal was worth stopping, it would typically seek a preliminary injunction in federal court to prevent the parties from consummating the deal. If the FTC was successful and the parties still wanted to move forward, they would then have the opportunity to make their case during an administrative trial. However, in the rare event that merging parties consummate a deal while the FTC review process is still pending, the FTC can still use the administrative trial to "unwind" the deal. It's a much steeper hill for the FTC to climb, and the difficulty of unwinding assets makes it a less than ideal remedy for consumers, but it has been done (see here).

The point here is that I wouldn't place too much stock in the 45-day agreement.

To read the rest of Blankenship's analysis, click on the link below. 

 Diagram of the influenza virus, courtesy Chris Bickel/Science

In Part I of Bill Harris' 180 Degrees column, he and Armageddon Empires' creator Vic Davis discussed how Davis got into game development, as well as the gamer interest and sales pattern for AE during its first three months of release. In today's second and final installment, the two examine the impact of influential journalists and outlets had on AE's sales in the months that followed. Finally, Harris steps back from his interview to extract some lessons that are invaluable to understanding how independent developers must approach their publicity and marketing campaigns differently from their peers at the big publishers--what Harris calls "the infection vector." Enjoy.

***

Part Three: Post-Release, Four to Six Months

At the end of October, Armageddon Empires was selected as "Indie Pick of the Month" in Games for Windows magazine. With that mention, page views on the website went up sixty percent in one week.

Yes, it was a real boost. Breaking the downward trend was a huge morale booster. The sales benefit was not immediately noticeable and still pretty modest, but it was a definite turning point. I'm still trying to figure out a model for how customers come to make their purchase decision for AE. You could probably identify sub-groups of customers... those who bought within the first 48 hours, those who spend a week with the demo, those who needed to hear something positive from a third party, and those who are still on the fence but might revisit it when their gaming backlog gets whittled down...that type of thing.

Then, in December, there were three prominent mentions. First, in the "Tom vs. Bruce" feature in Games for Windows. A week later, Kieron Gillen posted a highly favorable review at Eurogamer. At almost the same time, Tom Chick put AE as #4 in his top games of 2007 list.

There was more. In early January, Gamasutra/AIGameDev.com gave Armageddon Empires the "Best A.I. in an Independent Game" award, and Bill Trotter posted another highly favorable review at The Wargamer.

Here's what page views and sales look like with the second three months added (the arrow marks three months from launch):

To read the second and final part of Harris' column in full, click on the link below. 

 Armageddon Empires, developed and published by Cryptic Comet

It's been almost three weeks since we unveiled our plans to add a select group of columnists who would contribute monthly posts to Level Up. Today, we're pleased to introduce our third columnist: Bill Harris of the blog Dubious Quality. "Smart and caustic" is how we described Harris' writing when he made his Level Up debut last fall with a provocative post titled "How the Videogame Industry Shot Itself In the Joystick--and Why the Wii Has Stopped the Bleeding." The Austin, Texas-based analyst (who does not cover videogames in a professional capacity) will share his thoughtful, acerbic and often contrary observations with the Level Up faithful in a monthly series titled 180 Degrees. In his first column, which we're presenting to you in two parts, Harris speaks with designer and developer Vic Davis about the unusual path to success for his independently released turn-based strategy game Armageddon Empires, complete with charts derived from sales and site traffic data that Davis helpfully provided. For some excellent insights into how an indie developer can overcome the challenge of reaching an audience, read on.

***

On July 18, 2007, Vic Davis and Cryptic Comet released Armageddon Empires, a turn-based strategy game in a post-apocalyptic setting.

There was very little pre-release publicity, which is not unusual for an indie game. And like most indie games, the initial interest in Armageddon Empires steadily dropped in the first three months following release.

At this point, Armageddon Empires was on a very traditional arc for an indie game. This arc would end, soon, in game death.

Then, a funny thing happened. It didn't.

Instead, Armageddon Empires became the surprise indie hit of 2007, and sales have continued to increase into 2008. What made this game different is an interesting case study for indie developers who are having difficulty getting traction with their own games. I interviewed designer and developer Vic Davis, who shared his insight on the process of getting an indie game noticed.

Part One: Pre-release

You're 39 years old and you're tired of working for someone else, so you decide to make a game. That really sounds quite insane.

After I got out of the military I had intended to go back and work in the intelligence community when I finished my graduate degree. After my first child was born, though, I started re-evaluating priorities. I wanted to control my own fate and make my own decisions. I also had to come to grips with the fact that I enjoyed work more as a craftsman (even if digital) than a leader.

What made you decide to get into gaming development?

To read Part I of Harris' column in its entirety, click on the link below.

 Poster for the 1978 adult film "Debbie Does Dallas," courtesy idave.com

Last October, when we were looking for someone to explain why a massive launch for Halo 3 wouldn't necessarily get the stalled movie back on track, we wrote: "To answer that question, we turned to former Eidos Interactive president Keith Boesky, an agent whose Boesky & Company client list--includes the Robert Ludlum estate, Clive Barker, Spark Unlimited, Liquid Entertainment and GDH--sits at the nexus of Hollywood and videogames. We met Boesky at the DICE conference earlier this year, and were impressed by his thoughtful fluency in a wide variety of media." Boesky's maiden appearance on this very blog not only won us the notice of the indefatigable Nikki Finke, but confirmed our belief that Boesky's wisdom was worth sharing with our readership.

Since then, Boesky has taken to posting his musings on his own blog, A Tree Falling In the Forest, which we've often linked to in our daily High Score feature since he began posting in January. After periodic email exchanges on various and sundry topics, we asked Boesky if he would write a monthly column for us on his observations about the intersection of mass culture and game culture. He agreed, and we're extremely pleased to present his monthly column, Reports From the Front. In his debut, he expands on an offhand comment he made to us following his Halo movie post: that videogames not only have less cultural currency than comic books, they arguably have less cultural currency than porn. Take it away, Keith.

I once told N'Gai that society at large perceives games much as it does porn. My reasoning is simple: everyone looks, but no one will admit it. You would be just as likely to pick up a woman in the bar and ask her to come home to see your porn collection as you would to invite her back to see your kick-ass gaming set up. The likelihood of either achieving the intended goal is very low, and one would get you slapped before she walked away in disgust.

Then again, after thinking it through, I may be wrong. You may be more likely to choose porn. Applying the nine out of ten rule, nine out of ten women will say no to either proposition, but would you really rather have the one who says yes to games come home with you?

While it is easy to see the comparison, it is much harder figure out why. So when he asked me to expand on the thought and write a piece, it took me a while to figure out what to say. All I can do is talk on a personal level about a life in a career my parents don't understand and living on the receiving ends of disapproving stares everywhere from cocktail parties to school open houses.

I don't really know how we got to this point. Maybe it's because games are still considered toys. Even though most households own a game console, the vast majority of people consider videogames to be for kids. But if this misconception were the genesis of the low regard, Mickey Mouse would be mentioned in the same breadth as Jenna Jameson. He is mostly for kids, but adults don't put him in a porn box, and they are also willing to sit down and watch it with their kids. Some women may not even be offended if you asked them back to your place to see your digitally remastered "Steamboat Willie." But when it comes to games, Fox News has no qualms about backing journalist Geoff Keighley into a corner over the "Debbie Does Dallas"-meets-"Star Wars" content--content which is not even contained in Mass Effect. There must be another reason.

To read the rest of Boesky's column, click on the link below.

 

As we said in today's announcement, former guest poster Justin Blankenship has graciously agreed to join Level Up's select stable of monthly columnists. In his first post, he applied the insights he gained during his 2001-2004 tenure in the Federal Trade Commission's Mergers 2 division in Washington, D.C., to suss out the antitrust implications of Electronic Arts' intended purchase of Take-Two Interactive. Blankenship declared that the the FTC would likely take a hard look at the deal, and while some were skeptical of his analysis, he was proven right last week when his former employer issued a Second Request for more information on the proposed deal. In his debut monthly column, Blankenship returns to the EA/Take-Two imbroglio to answer some questions that others raised in response to his earlier post and shed some light on the thought process behind the FTC's recent decision. read on.

First of all, thank you to everyone who read my piece about EA's potential acquisition of Take Two, and especially to those of you who took the time to cover the piece or otherwise comment on it. Now that the FTC has issued a Second Request to EA and is clearly taking a hard look at the merger, this seems like a good time to recap where this deal is, and follow up on some interesting points that were raised.

1. "What is a 'Second Request' and what does this mean for EA/Take Two?"

A little background on how the merger review process works is helpful here. Under a law called the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (HSR), any merger or tender offer that exceeds a certain monetary threshold is required to file a Notification and Report Form with both the FTC and the Antitrust Division at the Department of Justice. The Form includes a description of the deal, the parties to the deal, and attaches certain documents relevant to the deal for government review.

Most importantly, the HSR filing starts a 30-day clock running for the government to review the deal during which it is illegal to consummate the merger. The vast majority of deals go through after this 30-day period, or even earlier if the parties have requested an "early termination" of the waiting period.

A much smaller percentage of deals, however, present some competitive concerns that require that the government investigation extend beyond the 30-day waiting period. Those deals receive what's called a "Second Request"--which is what EA got on April 17th.

To read Blankenship's column in its entirety, click on the link below.

 DVD cover for the 1995 film "The Usual Suspects," courtesy MGM

Over the Christmas break, we took some time to reflect on what changes or additions we could make to improve the blog. One of those concepts was Page 110, which debuted today. Another, which has also been some time in coming, was to add monthly columnists. We've always done our best to incorporate other voices into the mix here at Level Up, whether it's people who work in the videogame industry in some capacity in Outsourced, or interested outside observers in P2P. But in those cases where our blog opened up conversations among ourselves and a handful of gifted, thoughtful writers, we felt compelled to expose those voices to our modest but influential audience--you.

Our first official column, titled The Law and the Short of It, is penned by someone who should be no stranger to close readers of Level Up: Justin Blankenship, former Federal Trade Commission lawyer and current stay-at-home father. From Fall 2001 until early 2004, Blankenship worked in the FTC's Mergers 2 division in Washington, D.C., which reviewed mergers in the chemical, technology, and entertainment fields for potential violations of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, in search of potential anti-competitive concerns that would hurt consumers. So as part of his division's jurisdiction, he examined similar mergers while at the FTC. Blankenship sent us an email expressing his opinion that the FTC would take a hard look at the EA Sports/2K Sports part of this deal for antitrust reasons; we requested that he expand his thoughtful email into a full post, and based on his superlative work, we asked him to join our first wave of monthly columnists. Click here to read Blankenship's debut column, and be sure to check back later today for the premiere of our second opinionator.