Overexpensive PS3's and ESRB Fiascos : This week's idiot corner

Okay, I'm not even sure if NEXT WEEK will have an idiot corner. I mean, this is my 2nd post, for cripe's sake. However, I really need this get this off my chest, so here we go :

The PS3 doesn't have to be exceedingly expensive.

All right, so Sony's releasing two PS3 models. One won't have HDMI or Wifi. So right off the bat we've already established that this will be the "budget" model, and they've already butchered its ability to be useful on high definition televisions. It's only $100 cheaper, and that still leaves it as the most expensive game console released since the 3D0, inflation be damned.

However, still months away from launch, Sony has an opportunity to change things significantly.

First, a smidgen of background : Sony has an audiophile centric music format called SACD. Along with DVD-Audio and HDCD, it offers listeners with a higher standard of musical appreciation (at least, that's the theory) to enjoy music at a higher quality, with more channels of separation (I will personally voice for the gloriousness of surround sound music, at least when mixed well). However, most next-generation audio formats have a fatal flaw : They don't play in regular CD players, and as such, have had incredibly difficult times working their way into the market, much like HD-DVD and Blu-Ray will in a year's time (and with that, I now have next week's topic). However, this is where Sony's genius comes into mind : SACD is a hybrid format by default. It has two layers : A DVD-5 platter, and a standard 74-minute CD platter. CD drives won't see the DVD disc at all, and SACD players are based on a simple logical mindset : If someone puts a music CD in the drive, the player tests for another layer. If it's there, that's the layer that gets played.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

Okay, think about it. Why is the "cheaper" version of the PS3 still $100 more than a comparably equipped Xbox 360 was a year earlier? It has an arguably cheaper processor, along with a cheaper video chip. The controller won't cost all that much more than its predecessor, and even then it'll still be a point of profit at retail. So where does the cost come in?

Enter Blu Ray.

The first Blu-Ray players, which have MUCH cheaper hardware for playback than Sony's next generation of game system, will still cost $800-1000 for a player at launch this summer. The problem is that Blu-Ray is one of the biggest shifts in how optical drives read data in a LONG TIME. DVD just used a nicer-quality version of CD's laser, shrunk down to read finer pits. HD-DVD features the same concept. Blu-Ray uses a completely new laser technology, and whether it's a result of lower yields due to the change or simply a more elaborate manufacturing process in the first place, the drives are going to be VERY expensive to produce for the first couple of years. This is why the PS3 was delayed for nearly six months, and why the Xbox 360 is getting an entire year without competition in its generation.

The situation, however, isn't hopeless. Sony can solve a good chunk of their problems in a very simple way : A new format. I'm going to call it Blu-Ray Game for the sake of clarity. Already games on the PS3 have a different region setup; there's no reason they can't have a different disc format.

And that's what it would be, in theory: a dual-platter design, featuring a DVD-5 and a BR-25 with game data on them. Eureka!

Pretty much every game in this generation is going to either run off've a popular game engine, or be heavily influenced by middle-ware tools and libraries. As such, no one in their right minds should be hand-coding functions to load and run media files. This is the key to what could be Sony's most brilliant endeavor:

First, force developers to produce two versions of their games : An HD 25-gig version and a SD 5-gig edition. Force is a bit of a loaded word; Sony will provide the down-sampling tools and support, all designed in a way to make the lower-end copy of the game as easy to produce as possible. Save for a difference in the media loaded, the two codesets of each version would be perfectly identical. Because by 2006, if your function to load a movie file (which would take up most of the space on a game over 5 gigs in size) is dependent on it being a certain resoltion.

Second, Sony releases a $300-400 20 gig, non-BluRay PS3. They'd simply call this model the Playstation 3. The $600 version would be released as the Playstation 3 HD. At $400, without a Blu-Ray drive, the lower-end edition can compete directly with the Xbox 360. A $300 it'd be gold; customers could pick up a PS3 for the same price they payed for the last two generations of Sony consoles. Lacking Blu-Ray functionally, it simply loads the DVD-5 version of the game.

And with that, you have a workable split in your customer base that's largely transparent to said customers. People who spend two grand on a 40 inch plasma with HDMI ports pick up a PS3HD, those with a $400 Samsung 27" HDTV get a PS3 with component cables. Heck, if Sony added a film grain filter to the component output on a DVD, 95% of the populace wouldn't even notice the difference. I'm not looking down on those people, I'm just pointing out the feature that probably accounts for 95% of the difference between an Blu-Ray and DVD transfer of any movie over 4 years old. But I'll save that for next week.

Now, with that topic out of the way, let's get onto round two :

The ESRB isn't doing shit.

What the hell has the ESRB been doing?! All they seem to accomplish is getting the occasional game pulled off the market and the ability to rate games based on videos from the publisher. God forbid they hire a dozen game testers to at least make some verification of said content. All right, in all honesty, given the breadth of the game industry, they'd probably need several dozen. And they'd still have trouble with "hidden" content. However, that's an argument for a whole 'nother day.

We have game consoles now that can afford the same level of parental protection found in DVD players and cable boxes.

This is UNBELIEVABLY idiotic.

Video games are NOT movies. They're NOT TV shows. Game violence prevention advocacy folks have been quite content to make this point at ever conceivable opportunity, so why hasn't the industry LISTENED yet?

What I'm about to propose may cost too much to work. Who knows. I think if, done in-line with the rest of development, and if help and support is provided by console manufacturers to make the process as transparent to developers as is possible, it can work.

Games differ from movies and other forms of linear entertainment in that they're interactive. They're written as CODE. Code is the foundation of a game. It links the artistic assets together, and gives them form and function. It turns a narrative into an experience. And it has the ability to load into its world only what the programmers decide it can load.

See where I'm going with this one?

As it currently stands, you can set a minimum rating for content that requires a password to access. Let's say you set it to T/Teen.

Your kid pops in a Mature-rated game, let's say Dead or Alive 4. The console does a quick check, and lo and behold, the game's rating is a bit higher than the minimum of Teen. So a password prompt shows up, and the kid can't play.

Kids can be pretty resourceful at times, and child restraint procedures aren't incredibly effective if a kid is left alone for a considerable amount of time, sometimes as high as fifteen minutes. Ask anyone running Netnanny for more than three months, at which point there's a good chance they've walked in on their kid breaking it with little effort, as to how effective procedures for content-blocking really are.

It's not really hard to call Microsoft technical support and tell them you bought a used Xbox 360 at Gamestop and it has a password that's preventing you from playing the half-a-dozen games you bought. If the kid sounds too young, they can just have one of their friends do it from their house. Surely MS tech support has an option for such a problem, some trick they normally don't disclose to customers.

Or maybe the kid gets past it with brute force. There's about 10,000 combinations in an Xbox 360 password. A kid could try for a few minutes each day for a month and secretly play Quake 4 with his parents none the wiser for who knows how long; few people change their bank's password often, let alone the password on the Xbox.

And kids will break past this security, not because they love the violence, but because, quite simply, they want to play the game.

So where's the solution for this problem? The same place you'll find the solution for state governments that want to see people carded at Target when they want to pick up a game.

The developers.

So back to where I was going. With enough help from a console manufacturer, a developer can work into his engine rating-flagged content. It's simple : if the console is protected from the loading of mature-rated games, don't load all the textures, models, sounds and animations on the m-rated list.

What we'd end up with is dual-rated games. How much easier does that make everyone's life?

A kid walks up to the counter at K-Mart with a copy of Mortal Kombat VII. The clerk asks him to pay. Kid hands him the cash his parents gave him. Kid walks back to mom over in sports equipment. They go home. Kid pops game in Playstation 3. Ratings password screen pops up. However, right above it, there's a button that's called "play anyway". Kid hits button. Game starts, and he's happily pummeling away at his opponents. However, no one's bleeding, there's no fatalities, and the game's introduction movie is nowhere to be seen. However, he's playing the game and learning the combos, and is either non the wiser, or probably just doesn't care, so long as he gets to enjoy his birthday present.

What else can we do to make this even easier? Well, that's where the ESRB kicks in. Call it the "Parent's Stand" program, or whatever. It's simple. You make a video, a DVD even, where you explain to parents what the ratings system is, including the kind of content that designates a particular rating, and then present them with a menu at the end of the video that presents each game console currently available on the market as a choice. Parent picks it, and the subsequent video shows them precisely how to set the parental lock on that game system.

The discs are put in small slip-cases, and the slip cases are packed into small long cardboard boxes at the counter, not unlike those free sampler CD's for AOL. The clerk sees dad buying his kid Solders of Misfortune Jungle Bloodbath Honor Medal, and he either hands dad the DVD or slips it into the bag with the game. In one swift motion he has coverd both his and the game producer's collective asses when dad doesn't do his job of looking over the title's rating and walks in on his 10-year-old blowing off someone's head with a P90.

In addition, the game industry ends up with one hell of a bargaining chip in the debate over their responsibility to keep minors away from violent content in games. In fact, I'd say they have an out.

- Pedro Martinez