Tag Archive for 'opinion'

When functionality supercedes mimicry

Google Wave LogoIn watching the presentation for Google Wave, a new product in the works by Google, a feature that was demonstrated (and applauded) made me question when designing features for users undoes some of the benefits that individual terminals affords the user.

For those of you who don’t know, Google Wave is aiming to be the next evolution of online communication. From what I have seen so far, it seems to be a consummation of email, message boards, and chat, forcing users to no longer think of online communication as individual collections of messages and responses, but a cluster of ongoing conversations, where individuals can enter and leave at will.

The feature that piqued my interest, was the feature that turns the conversation into a chat, and allows both users to see the conversations being typed by each other in real time. While this could be very useful for conversing with someone who typed painfully slowly, it changes the way users have generally used instant messaging up until now.

Instant Messaging serves as a platform to allow generally, two people to have a conversation with each other in “real time”, where one user sends a message, the other responds, etc, in the same way that you and I may have a face-to-face conversation. If you wanted to map the features one-to-one, then while you are talking to me in person, I will be listening to your statement, and thinking about what I want to say in response, this is the same as reading your message in an IM, and typing my response in my client.

However, lets say you and I are having an in-depth conversation, or debate, on either medium. We make take our time to collect our thoughts, to consider our responses, and figure out what we want to say next. We may even completely change our response we had originally planned in order to answer some new topic that has come up. Either way, this can be afforded to us in IM clients by typing out our responses and looking them over before we send them off.

While I agree that when talking to someone over instant message, the time waiting for a response can seem length. However, almost all clients today will notify the receiving person that you are typing, alerting that there is indeed a conversation taking place. The question begs then, how do users react to a feature that allows us to see the response of a person, as it is being created?

While this is an interesting feature in it of itself, it could do one of a few things:

  • Bring users closer to the experience of having a true conversation through text.
  • Users would be distracted by the other person typing a response, or follow up message to what they just sent, and it would cause confusion.
  • A new rule of “internet etiquette” would appear within the use of this tool, and you would patiently wait for others to finish their thought before you start typing your response.

Google will offer a checkbox to turn this feature off, and it will be interesting to see how the response to this feature is received. Within innovation, one will ultimately be forcing adopters to rethink or retool their processes in order to adopt a new technology. It’s important to consider what the processes you are “fixing”, because maybe they weren’t broken, but a matter of course from the translation of a process from one medium to the next.

The next step in evolution?

A few months ago a friend and I were talking about the movie I Am Legend, and he was telling me the ending of book was far different from the movie. In the end of the book, the “zombie” leader explained to the protagonist that he not fighting a disease but was merely impeding the progress of evolution.

I’ve been thinking similarly along the lines of where console gaming has been taking the industry over the recent years, and wondering if we’re experiencing a similar response, are consoles the next step in gaming? Sure, there’s been a pretty defined split between the two throughout the past, with certain genres (most specifically FPS) generally being dominated in the PC market, while other genres would dominate the consoles (such as platformers, racing, sports, etc.). That line has become more and more split with the growing success of the consoles, and there aren’t many games for the PC that you can’t pickup for a console nowadays.

Three years ago, PricewaterhouseCoopers released a report predicting the rise in console success and the slowing of the success of the PC. I used some of this data to show the aggregate growth of online gaming as a whole for Zapdot’s business plan, hoping that they’d be wrong down the road. I was primarily a PC gamer then, and have my roots in gaming from the PC FPS (Rainbow 6, Quake 2&3, UT2K3, and CS and CS:S). Competitive gaming had bloomed on the PC platform, and has had some amazing appeal to network television through its success: from interviews to short segments, to full blown TV shows. Not surprisingly, PWC wasn’t off their marker three years down the road. While I haven’t had access to current numbers to correlate to their estimates, it goes without saying that console gaming is flourishing now, with thousands making the switch daily.

Wednesday’s Penny-Arcarde post made me revisit these thoughts, and they made some of the same arguments I’ve been barking at for awhile.

First and foremost, Computers have been always the best platform out there in terms of the technology that can be utilized for the games themselves. They have always looked better, provided more vast experiences in online play, and for awhile, put you in touch with a much larger community. The biggest selling point for me (and the deciding factor for most hardcore PC gamers) was the precision of input on the computers always trumped that of its console counterparts.

However, I’ve even found myself spending more time on consoles lately, and the answer as to why is pretty easy: comfort. I can sit down on my comfortable couch, and pick up a game for a few hours on my HD TV, enjoying surround sound if the system I’m in provides it. Moreover, the TV and surround system I’m using doesn’t have to be solely set aside for just a gaming system (or systems). With broadband I can just as easily play online with my friends as I could with my computer, with an interface that is centralized around the gaming experience

To get a similar experience on a computer, the price is higher, and includes more wires, more setup time, and potentially, a bit more of frustration and hassle. Tycho put it best, saying that someone who would prefer this simplicity doesn’t make them an idiot, it makes them pragmatic.

So take the PC Platform, and look at what made it better than the console system: online interaction, hardware, and input devices. These major issues are being addressed by Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo. Microsoft’s Xbox LIVE service is utterly amazing compared to what is out there right now. Integration with its games are near seamless, communication and community itself work very well, and with online collaborations like bungie.net to allow screenshot and movie sharing is a giant leap in the right direction. Sony had the right idea with the hardware, putting out the most powerful gaming console that the market has ever seen. This is effectively their biggest issue right now though, as it will take years for coders to even fathom the use of six cores to their benefit in game design. Regardless of this point, we’ve got the “power” concept that we are constantly revisiting in the PC segment being addressed and dealt with. Lastly, we come to the incredible precision that a mouse and keyboard provides to the user. I won’t go out and say that Nintendo has covered this angle, but they are pioneering the industry in the right direction. Nintendo had the melons to release a completely new form of input into games, and tear the industry away from the standard stick-button controller approach that it had been comfortably relying on for the past two decades. This input isn’t the best in the world for trying to convert PC gamers into a hardcore FPS shooter, but it’s a step in the right idea that we need to rethink the hardware we are giving gamers to interact with their virtual environments as they toil through them, and that we should take a direction that is not only fun, and simple but intuitive as well.

So I wouldn’t jump and say that PC Gaming is starting to see it’s demise, because the lines of what PC Gaming is has become more and more blurred, where the typical boundaries that defined PC Gaming has been adopted and translated into today’s modern day consoles. Furthermore, while a PC will be considerably more powerful than the latest console, console hardware specifications are catching up. I think (and certainly hope) that while games will still be available on the PC as time continues, we will start seeing a movement towards a better input system that potentially mimics or improves the PC’s dominating stance in this area, and a more unified console experience for gamers. As a whole, I think this generation is just the final step before we get to see the next evolution in games in how they’re delivered, played, and experienced by gamers.

But until then, I still need to decide if I want to buy Bioshock for the PC or my 360.