The hard stuff

Darren Waters looks at the competition in the platform market

Statistics are often misleading but sometimes numbers do not lie. The global video game industry generates $30bn in sales each year, and the average age of a gamer is said to be 28 years old.

In the UK we spend more on computer games than we do on films at the cinema.

According to Screen Digest, more than £1.5bn will be spent on games in 2007, compared with £821m spent at the cinema box office.

Children and adults are playing more games on more platforms than ever before - from games consoles, to set-top boxes, mobile phones, the PC, the web and even the iPod. Yet hardware is not necessarily a money maker in the gaming market. In the console arena, Microsoft has now sold 13.4 million Xbox 360s worldwide, Nintendo has shifted 13.2 million Wii machines and Sony has sold 5.6 million PlayStation 3s, yet both Sony and Microsoft lose money on every console that they sell. For them, consoles are the delivery system through which they deliver the software and services that make the money.

Microsoft has capitalised on its 12-month head start into the market in this round of consoles, but it is Nintendo that is the success story of 2007. It is the only one of the three firms to make money on each console it sells and the Wii has been a runaway success to such an extent that Nintendo is struggling to meet demand.

Targeting family gaming

The company has targeted family gaming and shied away from the hardcore gamer market, focusing on fun, social interactivity and simplicity. Of all the three consoles it is the purest gaming platform - it does not play CDs, or DVDs, let alone high definition movies.

The Wiimote controller, which uses motion sensitivity rather than a plethora of buttons to direct the action has proved a huge hit with gamers of all ages.

Actors Nicole Kidman, Patrick Stewart and Julie Walters are the faces of an advertising campaign for Nintendo's handheld console, the DS - hardly the stereotype of the friendless, teen gamer.

Nintendo has sold more than 53 million DS consoles worldwide, twice the number that Sony has sold of its PlayStation Portable (PSP). Here too, Nintendo has focused on pure gaming, while Sony's PSP is also promoted as a media player and web browser.

Long term, it looks certain that all three console firms remain committed to the business. Microsoft has the deepest pockets of all three companies and sees the Xbox as a gateway to the digital living room of the future. It has invested billions of dollars in Xbox over the past decade and has yet to see a single cent in profit. Earlier this year, Microsoft's Shane Kim predicted that the firm would see its first profit from Xbox before the end of the 2008 financial year.

Hardcore gamers

The Xbox 360 continues to be seen as a console for hardcore gamers, despite attempts to broaden its appeal with arcade games available via its online service Xbox Live. In just five years Xbox Live, has attracted eight million subscribers worldwide and offers not just gaming but also video downloads and voice and video calls over the internet.

Sony has had a sticky 18 months - with delays to the launch of PlayStation 3, a lukewarm response to games on the machine and complaints that the console is too expensive. It has now launched a cut-down, cut-price version of PlayStation 3 and sales have spiked as a result, up 197 per cent in the month following the refinements.

HD movie player

Sony also makes great play of the fact the console can play Blu-ray high-definition movies. But, with the battle of formats between Blu-ray and HD-DVD still aflame, it is too early to know if this is a feature that really sells the console to consumers.

In the US, sales of hardware and software this year are up 50 per cent on 2006 and Christmas holiday sales are yet to be factored in.

The platform that is expected to see the biggest growth in the coming years is mobile gaming. Global mobile gaming revenue is set to skyrocket from $2.9bn in 2006 to $9.6bn in 2011, according to analysts Gartner.

Mobile phones like the iPhone, LG Viewty and Nokia N95 are now powerful enough to offer 3D gaming experiences.

The inclusion of global positioning satellite technology in phones could also lead to a rise in location-based games, with real-time action dependent on the gamers' physical location in the world.

The other growth area for gaming is among casual gamers, with an estimated 56 million people worldwide who play games on their PC regularly - everything from online chess and card games to puzzle titles.

Common games platform

The industry is expected to be worth $1bn in 2008 and encompass 80 million players within three years. Long term, some in the industry have predicted that the hardware wars could become irrelevant. Gerhard Florin, a senior executive at giant games publisher Electronic Arts, said the industry would benefit from a common games platform, instead of competing, and incompatible, systems.

Games hardware manufacturers could perhaps one day be competing services, or channels. Your gaming device of choice - be it console, PC phone, or set-top box - could be your conduit to Xbox Live or PlayStation World or Nintendo Land.

Whatever the future holds for the manufacturers of hardware, one thing is certain - the popularity of gaming shows no signs of diminishing.

One day it might not matter what hardware you play your games on.

Darren Waters is technology editor, for the BBC News website

This article first appeared in the 17 December 2007 issue of the New Statesman, Christmas and New Year special 2007

Getty
Show Hide image

The New Times: Brexit, globalisation, the crisis in Labour and the future of the left

With essays by David Miliband, Paul Mason, John Harris, Lisa Nandy, Vince Cable and more.

Once again the “new times” are associated with the ascendancy of the right. The financial crash of 2007-2008 – and the Great Recession and sovereign debt crises that were a consequence of it – were meant to have marked the end of an era of runaway “turbocapitalism”. It never came close to happening. The crash was a crisis of capitalism but not the crisis of capitalism. As Lenin observed, there is “no such thing as an absolutely hopeless situation” for capitalism, and so we discovered again. Instead, the greatest burden of the period of fiscal retrenchment that followed the crash was carried by the poorest in society, those most directly affected by austerity, and this in turn has contributed to a deepening distrust of elites and a wider crisis of governance.

Where are we now and in which direction are we heading?

Some of the contributors to this special issue believe that we have reached the end of the “neoliberal” era. I am more sceptical. In any event, the end of neoliberalism, however you define it, will not lead to a social-democratic revival: it looks as if, in many Western countries, we are entering an age in which centre-left parties cannot form ruling majorities, having leaked support to nationalists, populists and more radical alternatives.

Certainly the British Labour Party, riven by a war between its parliamentary representatives and much of its membership, is in a critical condition. At the same time, Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership has inspired a remarkable re-engagement with left-wing politics, even as his party slumps in the polls. His own views may seem frozen in time, but hundreds of thousands of people, many of them young graduates, have responded to his anti-austerity rhetoric, his candour and his shambolic, unspun style.

The EU referendum, in which as much as one-third of Labour supporters voted for Brexit, exposed another chasm in Labour – this time between educated metropolitan liberals and the more socially conservative white working class on whose loyalty the party has long depended. This no longer looks like a viable election-winning coalition, especially after the collapse of Labour in Scotland and the concomitant rise of nationalism in England.

In Marxism Today’s “New Times” issue of October 1988, Stuart Hall wrote: “The left seems not just displaced by Thatcherism, but disabled, flattened, becalmed by the very prospect of change; afraid of rooting itself in ‘the new’ and unable to make the leap of imagination required to engage the future.” Something similar could be said of the left today as it confronts Brexit, the disunities within the United Kingdom, and, in Theresa May, a prime minister who has indicated that she might be prepared to break with the orthodoxies of the past three decades.

The Labour leadership contest between Corbyn and Owen Smith was largely an exercise in nostalgia, both candidates seeking to revive policies that defined an era of mass production and working-class solidarity when Labour was strong. On matters such as immigration, digital disruption, the new gig economy or the power of networks, they had little to say. They proposed a politics of opposition – against austerity, against grammar schools. But what were they for? Neither man seemed capable of embracing the “leading edge of change” or of making the imaginative leap necessary to engage the future.

So is there a politics of the left that will allow us to ride with the currents of these turbulent “new times” and thus shape rather than be flattened by them? Over the next 34 pages 18 writers, offering many perspectives, attempt to answer this and related questions as they analyse the forces shaping a world in which power is shifting to the East, wars rage unchecked in the Middle East, refugees drown en masse in the Mediterranean, technology is outstripping our capacity to understand it, and globalisation begins to fragment.

— Jason Cowley, Editor 

Tom Kibasi on what the left fails to see

Philip Collins on why it's time for Labour to end its crisis

John Harris on why Labour is losing its heartland

Lisa Nandy on how Labour has been halted and hollowed out

David Runciman on networks and the digital revolution

John Gray on why the right, not the left, has grasped the new times

Mariana Mazzucato on why it's time for progressives to rethink capitalism

Robert Ford on why the left must reckon with the anger of those left behind

Ros Wynne-Jones on the people who need a Labour government most

Gary Gerstle on Corbyn, Sanders and the populist surge

Nick Pearce on why the left is haunted by the ghosts of the 1930s

Paul Mason on why the left must be ready to cause a commotion

Neal Lawson on what the new, 21st-century left needs now

Charles Leadbeater explains why we are all existentialists now

John Bew mourns the lost left

Marc Stears on why democracy is a long, hard, slow business

Vince Cable on how a financial crisis empowered the right

David Miliband on why the left needs to move forward, not back

This article first appeared in the 22 September 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The New Times