Digital Britain Report Published

Add a Comment

Comment by Ewan McIntosh on January 30, 2009 at 4:33pm

All sounds a bit "them and us" to me, Brian. That's the problem. I don't feel I belong to any of these apparent factions of non-gamers and gamers. I see that gaming and narrative have more in common than they don't have in common. Maybe it's time for some new forums and events to exist. For example, is Edinburgh Interactive Festival really about interactive or gaming? That would be the ideal candidate to open the discussions up beyond the factions we see today.

Comment by Brian Baglow on January 30, 2009 at 3:01pm

Gentlemen,
I have to step in here and say that a great many developers and games types are already very well aware of the opportunities. For the first time *ever* game creators are no longer tied to dedicated hardware and can instead create games which can appeal to a vast global audience. From web browsers to mobile phones, the games market is opening up like it never has before.

Many of the smart developers are already active across this entire range of technologies and have checked out all of the advantages that the new social networks, online and mobile tools can offer.

Many of them promptly moved straight back out of these areas too, deciding to keep tabs on them from afar until viable business models and revenue streams can be identified. For while we love social revolution and new paradigms, unless some can come up with some cash, it's purely a hobby.

I'd also argue that while it is PROFOUNDLY true that game developers and publishers have been incredibly focused and anti-social in terms of the wider digital media sector in the past, the shoe is now on the other foot and it is the rest of the digital media market which is less interested in games.

I've lost count of the number of people I have spoken to from the tv, film, online, mobile, social and other areas, only to have them totally shut down as soon as games are mentioned. Many people are locked in the dedicated-hardware-physical-product-boxed-on-shelves era and don't see the new directions which gaming is expanding in.

OK, game developers may not be standing up at all of the right events to preach the good word and educate the masses about the bright, shining future - but's that's only because they've not asked me yet...

Comment by Stuart Cosgrove on January 30, 2009 at 9:52am

One of the key objectievs is the evolution through merger or partnership of a second Public Service Content Company to rival the BBC, with Channel 4 at the heart of the entity, these are the key parameters:

• “We see the BBC as the cornerstone of our audio-visual public services. We could have a vital, second Public Service Content Company, with access to rights and global markets, encapsulating the revitalised remit for Channel 4’s public purposes and with the scale necessary to be able to compete in a multi-media, multi platform world.

• In addition, there would be Five and ITV, focused on original UK content but with a continued commitment to news and in ITV’s case, regional news; S4C’s additional news proposal and desires in Scotland for a stronger, distinctive national voice not limited just to broadcasting.”

• “In the final Digital Britain Report, we will establish whether a long-term and sustainable second public service organisation providing competition for quality to the BBC can be defined and designed, drawing in part on Channel 4’s assets and a re-cast remit. While it makes sense to begin by looking at public sector bodies-Channel 4 and BBC Worldwide- the Government is currently evaluating a range of options and organisational solutions for achieving such an outcome.

• Channel 4 would continue to be the broadcast licensee within such an entity. For the public the viewing experience would be the same or better than today, but as a sustainable part of a wider whole operating successfully across the whole range of digital devices and platforms. There is a range of issues that needs to be addressed in achieving such partnership, including the governance and accountability arrangements required for any new structure. We will return to this in the final report.”

• “Many of the public purposes for which (C4) was created remain valuable in the digital age – innovation, diversity, original production from a wide range of independent producers. In a digital age, these purposes need to be re-invented and broadened to provide a strong source of plurality and competition to the BBC. At the heart of this new remit should be strong commitments to international and national news, current affairs, documentaries and film with the prospect of introducing programming for older children and news for the nations.

• In the medium term such a role could only be discharged successfully by an institution of sufficient scale and flexibility to sustain a viable commercially funded business model” and respond to a fast-changing environment.

Comment by Ewan McIntosh on January 30, 2009 at 9:50am

Games developers are certainly better placed, but they always have been - that's Aleks' point. The developer community, which IMHO lives somewhat apart from the rest of the creative industries, needs to look up from the console and see what potential there is for social gaming and new virtual consoles on the web. Maybe they are - and I will stand corrected - but sharing what's possible and learning from other parts of the creative and online industries is the only way significant strides can be made forward from what we had in 1998... and still have now.

Reports and analysis of the gaming industry today are full of words that, repeated too long, do not bode well: potential, "substantial opportunities", "promising", "unsustainable business models" (http://www.nesta.org.uk/level-up-building-a-stronger-games-sector/)

If the gaming industry is to make huge and rapid strides where the future bucks are - online and social online gaming - then it will have to open up a heck of a lot more, and learn from the mistakes and successes of its cousins who've been striding away in that world for years. Repeated lines of "such and such crowd don't understanding gaming" will have to be replaced with "we're going to help that crowd understand what we know about gaming and listen so we can learn from their worlds of film and narrative, social networking, nearly-now technologies, location-based and mobile technologies, artificial intelligence and visualisation...".

People want to interact with games, but they also want to interact - meaningfully - with other players and friends, reflecting their other online habits. "Interaction" nowadays inspires in people these many-to-many human interactions, not interactions with pre-written code. People expect games to respond to where they are and what they're doing in the real world lives. They'd love more games to be web-based, not stuck on one format. They'd love their game to be in constant beta, rather than reskinned and remarketed as a sequel. Where are the iPhone developers? Where are the MMO specialists? Where are the online gaming companies? Yes, there are some, but they're often young or coming late into a game that's already several levels on.
/rant over ;-)

Comment by Stuart Cosgrove on January 30, 2009 at 7:38am

Some big sign-posts in there too. Obviously my interest is taken by the upscaling and merger of Channel 4 into a new public entity by 2012 which increasingly looks like BBC Worldwide and decreasingly Channel 5. Also our old pal the terms of trade is raised again. Although for clarity Channel 4 have already announced that we will not produce content or creative servcies -in-house, and that they do not want to unpick the settled terms of trade with indies.

Comment by Paul Durrant on January 29, 2009 at 10:18pm

PS ......and as Aleks Krotoski said today in The Guardian (so it must be true..) ....... "Games Developers are better placed than anyone else to take the media by storm"

Comment by Paul Durrant on January 29, 2009 at 9:31pm

Of course, it is billed as work in progress and a number of aspects will be subject to further work between now and the final report later in the year – and there are feedback opportunities between now and then both on line and at regional meetings. There are a lot of very important and wide-ranging issues raised and discussed in the report so this posting much more by way of observation than criticism. The “Economics of Digital Content” are covered in the report but I think that the recognition of the video games sector and it’s economic potential hasn’t been adequately portrayed so far. It is interesting that NESTA which is closely connected to BERR and also DCMS recently made a very strong case for building a stronger games sector – a case that particularly focused on the scale and rate of growth - but that potential doesn’t seem to have merited much attention from BERR and DCMS as the report’s owners .......other than to reflect on the challenges. Yes, it is the challenges that will need the interventions – but it would be good for everyone to realise the potential we discussed here and elsewhere so that they fully understand the potential that will flow from the interventions.

And I couldn't resist the Razzall / Carter exchange I mention here